Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Bonta, a case where California Attorney General Rob Bonta is attempting to silence pro-life pregnancy centers from informing women about progesterone therapy as a means to reverse the abortion drug Mifepristone. In March 2025, a federal judge denied a motion to stop the censorship against two pregnancy center chains, Heartbeat International and RealOptions Obria Medical Clinics, allowing the state to use fraud and false advertising laws to stop the centers from promoting that an abortion in progress can be safely reversed. 

Liberty Counsel argues this “weaponization” of fraud laws to censor pregnancy centers is viewpoint-based discrimination and an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. Liberty Counsel has represented pro-life pregnancy centers and submitted the brief to help these organizations retain the freedom and autonomy to protect life for unborn children. This includes the right for these pregnancy centers to speak and promote the treatment known as “abortion pill reversal” (APR).

The APR protocol uses progesterone, a safe and naturally occurring hormone that has been used safely and effectively for decades to prevent miscarriage and preterm labor. Progesterone can potentially reverse the effects of the abortion pill Mifepristone if a woman changes her mind within 72 hours after taking the drug. Mifepristone starves the baby to death by blocking the naturally-occurring progesterone that helps a woman’s body sustain the baby.

Despite the pregnancy centers offering APR services free of charge for no economic gain, AG Bonta claims “someone must bear the cost,” and has accused the centers of fraudulent business practices and false advertising. He claims that APR is “commercial speech” that can be regulated by business laws. 

However, in an October 2023 press release, AG Bonta revealed his ideological viewpoint claiming advertisements for APR contained “lies and misinformation” and that most women “do not regret their abortion.” Yet, statistics show that 70 percent of women experience grief and regret after an abortion, and that the APR protocol has likely saved more than 6,000 unborn babies with a success rate of up to 64-68 percent.

In the brief, Liberty Counsel noted the context makes clear that AG Bonta rejects pro-life speech related to saving unborn children and conveys a message that because most women allegedly do not regret their abortions, then none of his constituents should have the choice to reverse an abortion, wrote Liberty Counsel.

AG Bonta supports women having the choice to seek a chemical abortion, yet wants to prohibit the same women having the knowledge of the choice to potentially reverse the abortion with progesterone.

“That unconstitutional dichotomy is plainly viewpoint discrimination and violates the First Amendment,” wrote Liberty Counsel.

Liberty Counsel also stated that APR-related speech is not based on commerce, and to classify it as both “commercial” and “false or misleading” contradicts 80 years of commercial speech precedent.

Notably, when the district court allowed AG Bonta’s censorship to stand, it not only treaded over First Amendment protections, but essentially outlaws off-label pharmaceutical use. While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved progesterone about 50 years ago to help maintain healthy pregnancies, prevent miscarriages, and for other uses, the district court took issue with this approval because there are not many studies assessing progesterone’s safety for use in APR. Despite decades of safe progesterone use, the district court deemed it unsafe for APR.

However, as Liberty Counsel explains, the FDA does not need to approve progesterone for every conceivable use, and healthcare providers can generally prescribe the drug for an unapproved use when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient.

“The district court’s sweeping ruling eliminated First Amendment speech protections for non-profits, while simultaneously outlawing off-label pharmaceutical marketing for other entities not espousing a pro-life viewpoint, and contradicting decades of legal precedent regarding the definition of commercial speech. It cannot stand under Supreme Court precedent,” wrote Liberty Counsel.

According to Dr. William Lile, who is board certified in Obstetrics and Gynecology and who has delivered thousands of babies, progesterone is “bio-identical” and “as natural as it can possibly be” to what a pregnant woman produces. Dr. Lile told Liberty Counsel that he has personally reversed the abortion pill 15 out of 19 times (a 78 percent success rate) and that abortion pill reversal protocol has safely reversed Mifepristone thousands of times across the nation.

More information about reversing the abortion pill can be viewed here.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The abortion pill reversal protocol gives a woman a chance to save her unborn baby by safely reversing an abortion. The government does not have the power to chill the free speech of pregnancy centers and take away a woman’s option to safely stop an abortion. California has deemed the off-label progesterone use and promotion as unfavored speech and pro-abortion use and advertisement of Mifepristone as favored speech. This attempt to weaponize business laws to censor life-saving treatment is blatantly unconstitutional and should be permanently struck down.”