Alliance Defending Freedom Profile picture
Oct 22 8 tweets 2 min read Read on X
"Pro-choice"? Not so much.

A thread about a shocking new legal tactic we're seeing from pro-abortion officials in multiple states. 👇Image
We’re currently litigating cases in NY, CO, and CA where state officials have tried to ban/punish pro-life speech.

These officials are trying to punish doctors, nurses & pregnancy centers who provide a treatment called abortion pill reversal (APR)... or even TELL women about it.
These politicians accuse APR providers of “misleading” women. But the evidence says otherwise.

APR uses progesterone, a natural hormone which has been safely prescribed to pregnant women for decades. Progesterone can counter the deadly effects of mifepristone when taken in time.
Statistics suggest APR has an effectiveness rate of 64-68%. It's safe for mom & baby and has likely saved thousands of lives, including...

- a baby girl born to Atoria in 2022 (CA)
- a baby girl born to Mackenna in 2024 (CO - pictured)
- a baby boy born to Desirae in 2024 (CA)Image
All three of these women are incredibly grateful for the pregnancy centers and healthcare providers who helped them use APR to undo a decision they immediately regretted: taking the first abortion pill.

All three of these babies were born healthy and are deeply loved.
It’s hard to believe ANYONE would oppose this happy outcome, or this lifesaving choice.

But if government officials in these states had gotten their way, these women would have been forced to have abortions they didn’t want. And these babies would have never been born.
These officials are abusing their power. They have no right to punish speech about a safe, legal treatment.

But they're also showing how extreme the modern pro-abortion movement is. There’s nothing “pro-choice” about banning speech so women are forced to have unwanted abortions.
In NY, CO, CA, and other states, ADF is fighting back. We’re suing officials and challenging laws that trample free speech and trap women in unwanted abortions.

You can help. Learn more and join our work defending pro-life pregnancy centers at adflegal.org/wecare

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alliance Defending Freedom

Alliance Defending Freedom Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ADFLegal

Sep 30
🚨BREAKING (NOT A JOKE): We're suing CA for humorless, authoritarian censorship of political speech & satire

Today, on behalf of @TheBabylonBee and @lawyerkelly, we filed a federal challenge to CA's new laws censoring online political speech.

The Founders didn't give us the #1A so politicians like @GavinNewsom could appoint themselves “fact checkers” and “humor police.” So we’re taking action.
👇🧵adfmedia.org/case/babylon-b…Image
How do CA’s laws censor free speech? Let us count the ways:
▪️They ban “materially deceptive” content depicting politicians that is “likely to harm” their “electoral prospects” — a vague standard that leaves people afraid to speak
▪️They ban reposting such content (even RTs to debunk/debate it)
▪️They create a lawsuit snitch line: anyone who sees a post can sue (a recipe for lawfare)
▪️They ban core political speech about candidates & elected officials, where it’s hard to separate fact from fiction
▪️They force people posting satire to add burdensome disclaimers
Read 8 tweets
Sep 5
BREAKING🚨🚨On behalf of three families, we've filed a federal lawsuit against @JeffcoSchoolsCo for their district policy that rooms students on overnight trips based on gender identity, not sex.

JeffCo refuses to give truthful, pertinent info about the overnight arrangements of their children. This is an egregious violation of parental rights.

The stories of the parents 👇Image
Joe & Serena Wailes:
Last summer, Joe & Serena got a nighttime call from their 11yo daughter, who was 2,000 miles from home on a school trip, because she learned that her bedmate was a boy.

The Waileses sent 2 letters to JeffCo requesting reasonable accommodations, but the district repeatedly denied their request.
Bret & Susanne Roller sent their 11yo son on JeffCo’s annual 6th grade camping trip and were told their son would be in a cabin with up to 30 other boys, including a male high school counselor. They realized the district lied.

While in the mountains with no way to contact his parents, the son discovered the 18yo counselor was instead a “non-binary” female who was not just sleeping and changing in the same cabin but also tasked to supervise the boys’ showers.
Read 5 tweets
Jul 20, 2023
@NewRepublic is at work manufacturing its FIFTH desperate attack on graphic artist Lorie Smith. Why? To impugn Lorie and delegitimize the landmark #SCOTUS ruling in #303Creative that protects every American’s free speech rights. Lorie has nothing to hide, so here’s the truth:🧵
The latest “bombshell” @NewRepublic thinks it has is that Lorie designed a wedding website FOR HER SISTER AS A GIFT years before her lawsuit and posted a picture of it to her 303 Creative portfolio to illustrate her design skills. That’s it. That’s the bombshell.
In 2014, Lorie’s sister was planning a small destination wedding, so Lorie created a wedding website for her for free. Lorie posted an image of the site to the #303Creative portfolio page in late 2014. This was SOP for Lorie.
Read 17 tweets
Jul 3, 2023
In the wake of the historic SCOTUS ruling protecting #FreeSpeech rights for all Americans, commentators, activists, and even the CO AG are desperately attempting to delegitimize and spread false information about 303 Creative v. Elenis.

Facts are important. READ THE THREAD⬇️
It's undisputed that Smith received the request in Sept. 2016 after she filed her case, and that she received other requests for custom weddings amidst the pending case.

Regardless, whether she received any requests at all is irrelevant to the legal issues of the case.
For @newrepublic:
To insinuate that Lorie Smith or ADF fabricated a request for a same-sex wedding website is a lie, and it's nonsensical because it wasn’t required for SCOTUS (or the court of appeals) to decide her case, a PRE-ENFORCEMENT challenge. DIVING DEEPER ⬇️
Read 11 tweets
Oct 13, 2020
No, @SenatorLeahy. ADF has never supported the passage of any laws criminalizing homosexuality, has never supported and unequivocally condemns the forced sterilization of every person. Visit ADFlegal.org/setting-the-re… to learn more.
Contrary to accusation from @SenatorLeahy, @AllianceDefends is respected Supreme Court advocate & majority of @senjudiciary’s members have joined friend of the court briefs in its cases before #SCOTUS
ADF has won 11 #SCOTUS victories in past 9 years. EmpiricalScotus.com ranked ADF first among top performing firms in the nation because of its success from 2013-17. We advocate for mainstream, constitutional legal positions. Learn more at IamADF.org #SCOTUS
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(