Albany, NY — New York attorney general Eliot Spitzer on Thursday announced an agreement with a Birthright crisis pregnancy center in Victor, New York that has paved the way for revoking the subpoenas given to crisis pregnancy centers across the state.
The agreement will help the state “clarify acceptable practices” for the pregnancy centers and resolves concerns the NY Attorney General had about potentially misleading advertising and inappropriate medical counseling, Spitzer's office said in a statement.
Pro-life advocates said the “concerns” are illegitimate and stem from a campaign sponsored by the National Abortion Rights Action League to discredit the work of crisis pregnancy centers. NARAL recently published a manual for abortion advocates to use to “expose” the work of pregnancy centers. NARAL's California affiliate used the manual at a recent meeting in Los Angeles to train activists to “infiltrate” pregnancy centers in California.
Although Birthright officials do not believe their past practices were deceptive, the management of the facility recognized the Attorney General's concerns and worked with the office to resolve them.
In a statement provided to the Pro-Life Infonet, Birthright of Victor indicates Spitzer has expressed in writing that he is “confident Birthright of Victor is committed to operating within the confines of the law.” Megan Jones, volunteer director for Birthright of Victor, said her office “is confident it has complied with the laws of New York state and is cooperating fully with the state attorney general's office to resolve any issues.”
The pregnancy center suspended operations after receiving the subpoena and will reopen Monday.
According to Spitzer's office, settlement negotiations have begun with attorneys representing several other New York crisis pregnancy centers and Spitzer has withdrawn their subpoenas in order to facilitate the discussions.
“This is an unexpected victory for the crisis pregnancy centers and for the First Amendment,” said Vincent McCarthy, Senior Counsel of the ACLJ, which represents one of five pregnancy centers in New York City that had been subpoenaed by Spitzer.
“It is clear that there has been tremendous pressure applied by the pro-life community since these subpoenas were issued. It is also clear that the subpoena was designed to intimidate our client and stifle the pro-life message,” McCarthy explained. “We are pleased that the New York Attorney General is taking the proper course of action and withdrawing the subpoenas.”
The ACLJ filed a motion to quash a subpoena in the Supreme Court of New York in Manhattan on February 14 contending the subpoena should be dismissed because it violates the First Amendment rights of the center by attempting to eliminate constitutionally protected speech.
Spitzer withdrew the other centers' subpoenas “as a gesture of good faith” and has begun negotiations with at least two other centers, one in Buffalo and another in New York City, said Darren Dopp, spokesman for the Attorney General's office. The subpoenas demanded the names of staff and their credentials, training materials, and copies of all policies and procedures pertaining to client referrals.
“For women seeking alternatives to abortion, CPCs can provide valuable services,” Spitzer said. “It is imperative, however, that the staff and management of these facilities understand and adhere to the law regarding advertising and counseling.”
“This agreement, which builds on previous consent decrees, sets forth a simple standard for CPCs. Its provisions are reasonable and fair and should benefit both CPCs and women seeking help,” Spitzer continued. “Using this solid settlement as a model, we hope to resolve outstanding issues regarding these centers.”
Birthright of Victor will address the concerns Spitzer raised by
informing women that it does not perform abortions or give abortion referrals, disclose verbally and in writing that Birthright is not a licensed medical center not qualified to diagnose or date a pregnancy, clarify that the pregnancy tests provided are self-administered and can be purchased over-the-counter.
The agreement is modeled closely on consent decrees obtained by two previous attorneys general in 1987 and 1995.
(This article courtesy of Steven Ertelt and the Pro-Life Infonet email newsletter. For more information or to subscribe go to www.prolifeinfo.org or email infonet@prolifeinfo.org.)