Pro-Life Dad Targeted and Raided By Biden’s FBI Is On Trial This Week

The Biden administration’s targeting of pro-lifers will be on full display this week with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of sidewalk counselor Mark Houck beginning on Tuesday. 

Houck’s case first received national attention when upwards of 20 FBI agents swarmed his rural Pennsylvania home in September of 2022 to arrest him on charges that he had violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, or “FACE,” Act. The FBI executed the unnecessary SWAT-like raid — reportedly complete with ballistic shields, a battering ram, and multiple agents aiming long guns at Houck — while his wife and seven children watched in horror.

This was unnecessary as in these cases, prosecutors typically issue summonses to appear and not an arrest warrant. In fact, Houck’s attorney informed the prosecutor that he would accept a summons on Houck’s behalf. 

Here’s what you need to know about the government’s specious criminal case against Houck. 

The Charges

Federal indictment Houck was charged with two felonies under FACE. Houck was taken into FBI custody. Anyone who:

By force, threat, or physical obstruction, injures, intimidates, interferes with, or attempts to interfere with, any person because such person is or was, or to intimidate any other person or class of persons from, obtaining, or providing reproductive healthcare services. 

In response to a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Congress passed the FACE Act. ruling The court ruled that abortion facilities couldn’t sue prolife protesters who block access to abortion facilities. The FACE Act was used against protesters and sidewalk counselors who were standing outside abortion facilities since its passage.  

The Clinton Department of Justice prosecuted approximately 10 people annually, while the Bush DOJ prosecuted two per year. This was despite the fact that it was passed in 1994. As of May 20,22, there were only 101 prosecutions Under the FACE Act, some were arrested by the Biden administration 26 pro-lifers for all alleged violations in 2022 of the FACE Act, including one case against Houck. 

The Biden administration’s criminal case against Houck stems from a single incident on Oct. 13, 2021, when Houck was involved in a physical and verbal altercation with Bruce Love — a “volunteer patient escort” B.L. was the only name used. throughout the indictment — outside the Planned Parenthood Elizabeth Blackwell Health Center in Philadelphia “PPC.” Houck, according to the indictment was a “protestor” Love was also familiar with Love outside of Planned Parenthood. 

Houck is the first charge in the indictment. “shoved B.L. to the ground as B.L. attempted to escort two PPC patients,” Houck was in violation of FACE Act. Houck was charged with the second count. “verbally confronted B.L. and forcefully shoved B.L. to the ground in front of the PPC, causing injuries to B.L. that required medical attention,” Also in violation of FACE Act. 

To convict Houck, the prosecution must prove Houck’s altercation with Love was “intentional,” and that Houck acted because of Love’s status as a provider of so-called “reproductive health services.” The FACE Act also requires that a person who is “injured, intimidated, or interfere[ed] with” To be “obtaining or providing reproductive health services.” 

Also, the prosecution must prove that Love was helping with abortion services or that a victim was trying to obtain such services during the alleged assault.  

The Problem with the Government

If the facts of the encounter match Houck’s claims, the government will not be able to prove either case. Houck says that his first encounter was with Love when Houck was talking to two women who had just left Planned Parenthood. Houck was taking these women to a crisis pregnancy centre across the street. If Houck’s version of events is true, it would be Love who allegedly violated the FACE Act, not Houck, as the FACE Act also protects pro-life pregnancy centers.

The second encounter between Love and Houck occurred, according to Houck, when Love approached him and his 12-year-old son and began to verbally harass Houck’s son using vulgar language. The encounter between Love and Houck was not involving a patient seeking services from Planned Parenthood. To establish a violation under the FACE Act, the prosecution must prove that Love qualifies as a “patient seeking services” for the purpose of establishing Love’s guilt. “provider of reproductive health services.”

The FACE Act defines “reproductive health services” To include broadly “counseling or referral services related to the human reproductive system, including services relating to pregnancy or the termination of a pregnancy.” The first question is whether there are any “volunteer patient escort” This definition includes qualifiers.  

Even if Love is deemed to be a spouse, the court will still agree with this conclusion. “volunteer patient escort,” however, that is still not enough to create criminal liability because the prosecution must still prove Love was doing so at the time of the encounter and that Houck’s alleged altercation was motivated by Love’s status, something the facts, as told by Houck, negate.

The jury will have to decide what actually happened. But given that Love previously filed a criminal complaint with the local authorities — which state prosecutors dismissed — and that in that complaint, Love made no mention of his encounter with Houck and the two women walking to the crisis pregnancy center, Love’s credibility will likely be lacking.

Peter Breen, Houck’s lead attorney, said that a jury could start hearing testimony as soon as today afternoon. Breen said that the trial could end as soon as Friday.

Houck could face up to a maximum of ten years in prison if he is convicted. “11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and fines of up to $350,000,” According to the DOJ press release. Based on Houck’s lack of any criminal history, however, the governing Federal Sentencing Guidelines would recommend a much lower range of six to 12 months.  

However, this assumes both a conviction and one which could withstand an appeal. This is unlikely given the facts presented to Houck and the absence of conflicting versions. Even an acquittal of Houck, however, would still represent a victory for the Biden administration, which succeeded in chilling pro-lifer activities through the raid on Houck’s home and his prosecution.

Anne Courchaine is an attorney. She was previously in private practice. Now she lives at home with her husband and their three children in Phoenix.