Use our account feature to register for a free CLI account. Your new account will allow you to bookmark and organize articles and research for easy reference later - making it simple to keep track of the research that's important to you!
Register / Sign in
Use our account feature to register for a free CLI account. Your new account will allow you to bookmark and organize articles and research for easy reference later - making it simple to keep track of the research that's important to you!
Register / Sign in
close-panel

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Get Notifications

Sign up to receive email updates from Charlotte Lozier Institute.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide world-class research in defense of life.

DONATE

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Maternal & Public Health

Assembly Bill 315 is an overly broad attack on pro-life pregnancy centers

As Albert Einstein once said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

Lawmakers in California would do well to heed the words of the Nobel laureate and preeminent scientist of the 20th century. While community-based, pro-life pregnancy centers are forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars to protect themselves from violent, anti-woman attacks, they now face an additional and repetitive attack – not from masked and hooded vandals, but from their own elected representatives.

This prompts the question: Are California lawmakers insane for repeatedly proposing regulations against, and failing to protect, pro-life pregnancy centers? If we look at Einstein’s definition, the clear answer is yes.

Assemblywoman Rebecca Bauer-Kahan’s proposed Assembly Bill 315 would enable limitless fines against community-based pregnancy centers for supposed violations. This vague and overly broad bill, like its predecessors, suffers from serious constitutional problems. Between 2007-2020, similar bills have been considered and rejected in nine states (Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Oregon, Texas,Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia).

Continue Reading at The Orange County Register>>

Latest Posts

June 13, 2025 Inducing Demand for Abortion in the Absence of Medical Necessity: Planned Parenthood and Abortion Drugs Inducing Demand for Abortion in the Absence of Medical Necessity: Planned Parenthood and Abortion Drugs June 12, 2025 New Peer-Reviewed Article: Planned Parenthood, Abortion Drugs Major Drivers of U.S. Abortions New Peer-Reviewed Article: Planned Parenthood, Abortion Drugs Major Drivers of U.S. Abortions June 10, 2025 Alternatives to In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) for Overcoming Infertility and Delivering a Healthy Baby

You Might Also Be Interested In

Inducing Demand for Abortion in the Absence of Medical Necessity: Planned Parenthood and Abortion Drugs

Inducing Demand for Abortion in the Absence of Medical Necessity: Planned Parenthood and Abortion Drugs

June 13, 2025
Please login to bookmark Close
New Peer-Reviewed Article: Planned Parenthood, Abortion Drugs Major Drivers of U.S. Abortions

New Peer-Reviewed Article: Planned Parenthood, Abortion Drugs Major Drivers of U.S. Abortions

charlotte-lozier-institute Charlotte Lozier Institute
June 12, 2025
Please login to bookmark Close

Alternatives to In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) for Overcoming Infertility and Delivering a Healthy Baby

June 10, 2025
Please login to bookmark Close

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide
world-class research in defense of life.

BECOME A PARTNER
cta-image