In a significant move that has sparked intense debate, former President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he has pardoned 23 pro-life individuals convicted under President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice for demonstrating or praying outside abortion clinics. The activists were prosecuted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a federal law aimed at protecting access to reproductive health services.
“Twenty-three people were prosecuted, they should not have been prosecuted. Many of them are elderly people — they should not have been prosecuted,” Trump said during the announcement. “This is a great honor to sign this.”
Lengthy Sentences for Peaceful Demonstrations
Critics of the prosecutions argue that the individuals, many of them elderly, were unfairly targeted for peaceful demonstrations. Joan Bell, a 76-year-old Catholic activist, was sentenced to two years in prison for her involvement in a protest at the Washington Surgi-Clinic, a facility known for providing late-term abortion services. Bell and others like her were charged with felony conspiracy under the FACE Act, adding significant weight to what might otherwise have been minor offenses.
Similarly, Paulette Harlow, a 75-year-old grandmother with diabetes and Hashimoto’s disease, was sentenced to two years for participating in a protest in Washington, D.C. Due to her medical condition, Harlow served her sentence under house arrest until her pardon.
Other cases involved groups singing hymns and praying outside clinics. In Nashville, Tenn., several individuals were sentenced to terms ranging from six months to three years for obstructing access to a clinic. Among those pardoned were Beverly Williams, a mother of a 2-year-old, and John Hinshaw, a grandfather whose grandchildren were born during his incarceration.
Pro-Life Organizations Applaud Pardons
Pro-life organizations have praised Trump’s decision, framing it as a corrective to what they view as an overreach by the Biden administration. Tommy Valentine, president of CatholicVote, called the pardons “a great credit to [Trump’s] legacy,” and urged further action to ensure the even enforcement of the FACE Act.
Heartbeat International also released a statement expressing gratitude for the pardons: “When pro-lifers are unfairly targeted, and punished excessively, for their peaceful protests, then presidential pardons are a must. We are grateful for President Trump’s effort to right the wrongs of the activist Biden administration.”
Criticism of the FACE Act’s Application
Pro-life advocates argue that the FACE Act, originally designed to prevent violent blockades of clinics, has been weaponized to impose disproportionate punishments on peaceful protesters. Activists like Joan Bell and Paulette Harlow have long been known for their commitment to nonviolent civil disobedience.
Joan Bell’s case, in particular, drew attention due to its association with the Washington Surgi-Clinic, operated by Cesare Santangelo. Pro-life circles have criticized Santangelo for allegedly supporting late-term abortions and refusing to provide care to infants born alive during abortion procedures. Activists have also pointed to the discovery of fetal remains at the clinic as evidence of troubling practices.
Calls for Broader Reforms
While the pardons have been celebrated by pro-life advocates, many are calling for broader reforms. CatholicVote and other groups have urged future administrations to ensure the FACE Act is applied consistently, including against perpetrators of violence targeting pregnancy resource centers and churches. In recent years, such incidents have reportedly gone under-prosecuted, fueling accusations of bias in enforcement.
Trump’s pardons represent a continuation of his administration’s strong pro-life stance, a key issue for many of his supporters. The move is likely to energize his base as he continues to position himself for a potential return to the White House in 2024. However, critics argue that such decisions risk undermining federal protections for access to reproductive health care and send a controversial message about the rule of law.
0 Comments