Lawyers of imprisoned DC anti-abortion activists aim to challenge FACE Act’s constitutionality.
Attorneys to Challenge Constitutionality of FACE Act in Post-Roe Era
Attorneys representing an anti-abortion advocate convicted on federal charges of blocking access to a Washington, D.C., abortion clinic are gearing up for an appeal that challenges the constitutionality of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act) in the post-Roe era.
Conviction and Controversy
Prominent anti-abortion activist Lauren Handy and four co-defendants were recently convicted for violating the FACE Act during a protest inside the Washington Surgi-Clinic in 2020. Facing up to 11 years in prison, Handy’s legal team is determined to challenge the conviction and the judge’s decision to keep their client incarcerated.
“Since the Dobbs decision that reversed Roe, there’s a very serious question about whether the federal government has any further interest in the abortion issue,” Cannon told the Washington Examiner.
Handy’s defense argues that the judge hindered their ability to fully convey their client’s intent during the trial, providing grounds for a procedural appeal.
Constitutional Grounds for Appeal
Handy’s attorneys plan to file a long-term appeal, contending that the recent Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision renders the federal FACE Act unnecessary and constitutionally inapplicable. They argue that protecting access to abortion clinics should fall within state jurisdiction, eliminating the need for federal intervention.
“The court has kind of created a legal fiction that now the FACE Act doesn’t protect abortion, it protects other reproductive health services,” said Crampton. “[But] the actions of our clients here were motivated solely by the abortion end of things, not pap smears and other reproductive health services, and the FACE Act without abortion as its route really doesn’t have any federal validity any longer.”
Timeline and Release
The defense team has already filed a brief of appeal to secure the release of Handy and her co-defendants. They argue that the clinic employee’s ankle injury does not meet the criteria for a “crime of violence” that justifies holding the defendants in custody until sentencing.
The full appeal on constitutional grounds will be filed on September 29, with the government having the opportunity to respond. The higher court is expected to review the case in October.
Handy’s Condition and Response
Despite her incarceration, Handy remains in good spirits. In a statement, she responded to criticism from within the anti-abortion movement, emphasizing the importance of love and advocating for the most vulnerable.
“This isn’t a numbers game — this is about love. Loving the most useless, abandoned, and unwanted without fear of punishment,” said Handy. “It’s not just ‘sad’ when an unborn person is murdered, it is acutely devastating. Someone needs to feel and mourn deeply. Someone needs to love to the point of supposed uselessness.”
Handy’s case highlights the ongoing legal battles surrounding abortion rights and the evolving landscape in the aftermath of the Roe v. Wade decision.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
