Pittsburgh-area state Rep. Lindsay Powell is rallying in Harrisburg today, urging lawmakers to enshrine into Pennsylvania law a federal act that protects abortion clinics from threats and damages. Powell’s bill comes on the heels of a Trump administration memo directing the Department of Justice to dismiss several cases against those accused of obstructing care at reproductive health clinics.
Powell said federal protections for abortion clinics and their patients are being, “undermined and deprioritized at the federal level,” and she wants to see Pennsylvania enact criminal penalties for those who threaten “the right to reproductive freedom.”
The FACE Act — which stands for Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances — was signed by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and made it a federal crime to use or threaten force or physical obstruction to prevent an individual from obtaining reproductive health care services. It also criminalizes property damage aimed at obstructing operations at clinics.
But a January Department of Justice memo directed officials to dismiss several cases involving individuals threatening abortion clinics, including one based in Philadelphia where a man barricaded himself in the bathroom of a Planned Parenthood and had to be forcibly removed by police. The memo instructs federal officials to now only pursue charges “in extraordinary circumstances,” or in cases involving “death, serious bodily harm or serious property damage.”
Powell is worried the directive undermines the right to access health care and encourages anti-abortion activists who she says are, “waiting in the wings.”
“The reason that we have this federal law is because previously we were seeing bomb threats, we were seeing assaults, doctors, nurses… and patients being physically assaulted in front of clinics,” she said. “My deepest fear is if the federal government fails us and we don’t have a failsafe in Pennsylvania, we could be repeating the dangerous and dark history we've seen before the FACE Act existed.”
D.C. Republicans have made unsuccessful attempts for decades to repeal the law, arguing it unfairly targets anti-abortion activists. Texas Congressman Chip Roy reintroduced a measure to repeal the law in January, arguing it has been “weaponized” against the free-speech rights of anti-abortion activists. But FACE Act advocates argue the law ensures the right of individuals to seek health care services. They also point out it protects anti-abortion pregnancy centers and churches from similar threats.
Regardless of whether a Republican-controlled Congress repeals the law, the Trump administration memo has already scaled back enforcement of it.
And as anti-abortion protesters are in the middle of a 40-day protest campaign, the timing has left some Pittsburgh-area abortion clinics worried about what recourses remain.
Protesters regularly turn up at Pittsburgh’s downtown Planned Parenthood clinic. Patients there, many of whom are seeking sexual health and reproductive care other than abortions, are more anxious than before according to Michael Gibson, communications director for Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty from people about how access to care may be changing day to day. I think the fear is that they will show up and something will have changed that they don’t know [about],” he said. “There has been significantly more anxiety coming from them as they try to get information on how to get to their appointment.”
The downtown Planned Parenthood has not reported a FACE Act violation in several years, according to Gibson. A 2011 case against a protester outside of the clinic resulted in a five-year consent order, barring a man from getting within 25-feet of the clinic. Gibson said the protester returned to picket the location soon after the order expired.
Despite infrequent charges in Pittsburgh, Gibson said the Trump administration’s dismissal of more serious FACE Act cases and its support of new restrictions could encourage protesters to take bolder action.
“The deprioritization of enforcement means that a lot of protesters or bad faith actors in our communities will be emboldened and will break that law more frequently,” Gibson said. Which could, “potentially escalate aggression and violence towards abortion workers and our patients.”
Across town at the Allegheny Reproductive Health Center (ARHC), an independent clinic that provides a slate of sexual and reproductive health services as well as abortion, workers are also wondering what a scaled back FACE Act could mean for them.
Nikkole Terney, ARHC’s director of abortion care, handles patient coordination and ensures procedures are moving along smoothly at the East Liberty clinic. Terney said ARHC sees fewer protesters because of its location — the main entrance is along a side street unlike Planned Parenthood’s Liberty Avenue entrance — but that those who do show up are more dedicated to discouraging patients from receiving care.
“Whenever we have Black patients coming in, they say extremely racist things,” she said. “They would outright just say like ‘Are you sure that Black Lives Matter?’ and ‘You’re committing genocide against your own race.’”
Terney said she has also been the target of verbal abuse, as well as other Black employees. And though first amendment rights protect protester’s ability to say such things, she sees how it can traumatize patients during an already vulnerable moment.
“The moment they see the protesters, they hear those words [and] all of the strength that they have built leaves them,” she said. “We don’t yell those things when a man is going into a vasectomy. Or when anyone is going to any other kind of care.”
The building has also been targeted during off-hours when someone glued shut the door to the clinic as well as a neighboring business.
Rogelio Garcia II, director of security and safety at ARHC, has worked at the clinic for 12 years and seen his fair share of engagement with protesters. While he agreed with Terney that their clinic sees fewer protesters compared to Planned Parenthood, he argues those that turn up across the street from his office window are bolder.
“We get the crazier ones here,” he said. “They don't do a lot of the outlandish things at the downtown [clinic] because you're there in the middle of the city.”
Garcia said the FACE Act provides a recourse for workers like him to report acts of physical violence and property damage to federal law enforcement. Now that enforcement is being scaled back, he said he’s unsure about how responsive the government will be when incidents occur.
Pittsburgh’s buffer zone
The federal scaling back of the FACE Act doesn’t leave Pittsburgh clinics with zero protection. The city is one of only two in Pennsylvania with a so-called “buffer zone” law.
Buffer zones are limited, fixed areas surrounding clinic entrances designed to protect patients and facility employees from harassment, obstruction, and potential violence, and were created in response to disturbances outside these clinic locations by anti-abortion advocates.
In Pittsburgh, protesters are prohibited from coming within 15 feet of the entrance to a clinic, hospital or other health care facility. The law has been challenged but was unanimously upheld in 2019 by a federal appellate court. In February, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the legality of buffer zones, rejecting an argument that they impede free speech.
The courts did tweak the city’s buffer zone law to make an exception for so-called “sidewalk counseling.” The exception allows a demonstrator to speak with a patient — and even urge them not to seek an abortion — so long as they do not physically impede access to the clinic.
But providers debate whether the buffer zone — which is painted in yellow along the sidewalk or street — is an effective protection. That’s because “counseling” can be broadly defined, Gibson said. And that makes it difficult for escorts — people who volunteer to walk with a patient into the clinic — to know when to intervene.
“We’ll see protestors try to engage with the presumed support person coming with the patient [and] a support person is more likely to engage as they don't have the same responses that our patients generally would in those moments,” Gibson said.
He stressed however that local law enforcement has been “responsive to our concerns and incident reports.” And he noted that Planned Parenthood largely avoids engaging with protesters at all, as a matter of policy.
At ARHC, Garcia said he frequently has to engage with protesters who push the boundaries of the buffer zone. And he’s had to intervene physically, which sometimes results in physical altercations.
“I've said it multiple times to them [that] you can't block the pathway of a patient going into a medical facility, and their excuse is, ‘Oh, I'm counseling,’” he said.
Garcia said city enforcement of the buffer zone is inconsistent and often depends on how soon a city police officer responds to the scene. He said protesters have been cited for violating the buffer zone, but in several cases, charges were dropped and they soon returned to the clinic.
Grace Ferguson, a Pittsburgh-area OB-GYN, said she regularly sees protesters ignoring the buffer zone at clinics. “They follow you until you’re in the door,” she said.
In a statement, Pittsburgh’s law department said local law enforcement is committed to enforcing city laws and changes to the FACE Act would not affect how the city enforces state or local laws.
“We will continue to monitor the entrances to the clinics when there is a need,” a spokesperson said. “The city regularly repaints the lines around the clinic and assists when the clinics make a request.”
Pennsylvania’s FACE Act
Providers are eager to see Pennsylvania adopt the FACE Act protections at the state level.
“I think at the state level, it would help us out more than at the federal level,” Garcia said. Since local police primarily enforce state and local laws, charges could be filed more often and more quickly, he suggested.
Powell’s bill would impose prison time, a fine or both for those convicted of violating the law. The bill is under consideration in the Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee and could be amended before it’s potentially brought to the floor for a vote. As written, the bill would impose imprisonment for up to a year and a fine up to $3,000 for those convicted.
If it passes, Gibson said organizations like Planned Parenthood would have a new resource to track incidents, something he said could be lost as the federal government enforces its protections less frequently.
“I think the biggest issue is that we lose an avenue for simply reporting,” Gibson said.
When she introduced the bill in February, Powell said state leaders owe it to their constituents to ensure health care services remain accessible and safe.
“As long as abortion is legal in PA, all efforts must be made to not only keep reproductive health care readily accessible, but to keep both patients and providers safe during these processes,” Powell said. “Intolerance of any kind runs counter to the constitutional rights of residents and has no place in this Commonwealth.”
Ferguson said she was optimistic about how new protections at the state level could add a layer of safety for patients and providers alike.
“It [would be] great to have state protection,” she said. “But it’s sad that this is a conversation we have at all.”
