New York Attorney General Letitia James is facing a lawsuit due to her efforts to promote abortion in the state. The lawsuit centers on James’ decision to stop pregnancy centers from promoting abortion pill reversals.

The legal action is being brought by several Christian organizations that provide alternative services to abortion for mothers. Democrats have ramped up their fight against crisis pregnancy centers since the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Pregnancy centers in New York are challenging state Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, for attempting to trounce their efforts to promote abortion pill reversals, arguing her office is violating their First and 14th Amendment rights.

A coalition of Christian pregnancy centers represented by the Thomas More Society filed a lawsuit against James on Tuesday after the Democratic attorney general sent an April 22 letter to several anti-abortion groups accusing them of “repeated and persistent misleading statements and omissions” stemming from their support of abortion pill reversal methods.

“This is a political witch-hunt against small nonprofits that have selflessly served New York’s pregnant women and their children for over 50 years,” said Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive vice president and head of litigation.

Abortion pill reversal methods can be undertaken in instances in which a woman changes her mind and seeks to reverse the effects of mifepristone, one of two drugs used in a drug-induced abortion process. Anti-abortion doctors handling patients who have taken mifepristone typically prescribe a dose of bioidentical progesterone to offset the effects of mifepristone.

The Thomas More Society is a national nonprofit public interest law firm focusing on pro-life causes and religious liberty. It was founded in 1997 to provide legal expertise that aligns with its mission to protect human life and religious freedom.

The lawsuit alleges that the attorney general is using her position to restrict the First Amendment rights of pro-life activists. The filing argues that James: 

has no business butting into the intimate medical decisions of an expectant mother, in consultation with the medical professional of her choice, to carry her pregnancy to term and save her unborn baby from the disastrous effects of mifepristone while there is still time to undo the effects of that powerful chemical.

The Thomas More Society discussed how James’ office is targeting crisis pregnancy centers in New York, highlighting a threatening letter she sent to these organizations.

On April 22, James’ office sent “Notice of Intention to Sue” threat letters to at least a dozen pregnancy help organizations that offer or share information about the APR protocol. James’ threat letter falsely accuses the targeted pregnancy help organizations of “repeated and persistent misleading statements and omissions.” In their filing today, Thomas More Society clearly lays out why the organizations’ communications about APR are truthful and, even more, fully protected under the First Amendment. The threat letters gave these pro-life ministries only five business days to explain why James should not sue them for false advertising—their lawsuit is the response to those notices.

Abortion reversal medication has been shown by at least one study to prove effective at reversing the effects of mifepristone. For mothers who change their minds after taking the abortion pill, this could be a valid way for them to save their children, which explains why folks like James might not want people to know they have this option.

This development further underscores the reality that Democratic officials have gone from being pro-choice to pro-abortion. Not only do they seek to make abortion available, they wish to stamp out those offering alternatives to terminating a pregnancy. The reality is that if women want these alternatives, the state should have no business trying to stop them.

Kathy Jerman, Executive Director of New Hope Family Services & President of NYS Coalition for Life, argued that “If we truly believe that women should have a choice in her pregnancy decision, then she should also have the choice to reconsider her abortion after taking the first chemical abortion pill.”

Jerman also criticized James for lying about the efficacy of the abortion pill reversal treatment, arguing that it “gives women a second chance to choose life.”