Overview
Attorney General Merrick Garland has committed to reviewing requests from Republican legislators regarding the enforcement of the FACE Act, a law that has sparked controversy over its application against pro-life activists. This review comes amid accusations from GOP members that the Biden administration is selectively applying the law to suppress their advocacy.
Why It Matters
The integrity of law enforcement and its impartial application are crucial to preserving the rights and freedoms of all U.S. citizens.
Who It Impacts
This issue directly affects pro-life advocates, potentially influencing the broader dialogue on how legal protections are applied across different groups in America.
At a recent congressional budget hearing, Attorney General Merrick Garland responded to Republican queries concerning the application of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) pressed Garland for data on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) enforcement of the FACE Act, suggesting that the DOJ has been using the law to target pro-life activists unfairly.
Garland stated he will “look into” the matter, acknowledging that he was not familiar with the specifics of the requests made by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who first sought this information in October 2022 and again in February 2023. The FACE Act, established during the Clinton administration, is designed to prevent physical and threatening barriers to accessing abortion facilities. However, Republicans argue that its enforcement has been one-sided, particularly after the conviction of six pro-life activists in Tennessee in March 2021 for a peaceful protest.
Following the hearing, Clyde took to social media to criticize the Biden administration’s handling of the FACE Act data, accusing them of concealing their biased enforcement tactics. “The DOJ has repeatedly stonewalled my friend @RepChipRoy’s requests for FACE Act data,” Clyde tweeted. The continued push for transparency comes as the DOJ faces further scrutiny with more recent convictions of pro-life protesters in Tennessee earlier this month.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) alongside Roy has advocated for the repeal of the FACE Act, arguing that it should protect all entities, including churches and pregnancy centers, not just abortion clinics. The controversy centers on whether the act is disproportionately used against pro-life groups while ignoring similar violations by pro-abortion activists.
In the face of these contentious debates, both Garland and Assistant AG Clarke have now pledged to release the requested FACE Act data. This move could potentially reveal the extent of what critics call a “weaponization” of the law against pro-life Americans, further fueling the ongoing national discourse on freedom of speech and the right to peaceful protest.
While the DOJ has agreed to consider releasing the data on FACE Act enforcement, the underlying issue remains deeply divisive. The selective application of laws can undermine trust in legal systems and institutions, suggesting a need for a more balanced approach to enforcement that respects the rights of all parties involved.
