The Center for Reproductive Rights is urging lawmakers to reject the repeal of the FACE Act.
Anti-abortion lawmakers are intensifying their efforts to repeal the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act), prompting intense backlash from advocates for reproductive rights, particularly following a recent tragic bombing at a fertility clinic.
In January, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) introduced a repeal bill that poses a risk to the sole federal law addressing violent, threatening, or obstructive actions against individuals seeking or providing reproductive health services, which encompasses both abortion and fertility care.
The FACE Act, enacted in 1994 with support from both parties following the tragic murder of Florida abortion provider Dr. David Gunn, has functioned as a protective measure against clinic bombings, assaults, and blockades. Experts caution that without it, there is a risk that extremists may increase their threats without facing consequences.
“This law was enacted due to the tragic loss of lives,” stated Renee Chelian, a clinic founder and CEO who provided testimony before Congress regarding the significance of the FACE Act. “Repealing it sends a message to those who engage in violence: you are invited to stay.”
In the aftermath of the Roe v. Wade decision, there has been a notable increase in violence related to anti-abortion sentiments. Recent reports indicate a troubling rise in incidents of arson, assault, and intimidation aimed at those involved in reproductive health services, including both workers and patients.
In a surprising development, President Donald Trump has granted pardons to 23 individuals who were previously convicted under the FACE Act, with many having been involved in harassment and clinic invasions.
Opponents contend that overturning the legislation would empower extremist individuals and jeopardize the safety of the community. “This goes beyond politics—it concerns real lives,” Chelian emphasized.
Advocates for reproductive rights are calling on the public to reach out to Congress and voice their opposition to the repeal, cautioning that the removal of the FACE Act could leave patients and providers vulnerable.