The recent conviction of a New York woman for vandalizing a pro-life pregnancy center has Attorney General Merrick Garland coming under pressure to walk the talk.
Hannah E. Kamke, 40, of Buffalo, pleaded guilty Sept. 14 to one count of disorderly conduct for spray-painting “LIARS” on the sign outside CompassCare in Amherst, New York, the same pro-life pregnancy center that was firebombed last year.
Now CompassCare CEO James Harden wants Mr. Garland to follow up by bringing charges under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, challenging him to prove the Justice Department doesn’t have its thumb on the scale when it comes to abortion-related prosecutions.
“This is a violation of the FACE Act,” Mr. Harden said. “But they’re refusing to indict in this particular instance. And Merrick Garland promised under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee that he would apply the law equally if we found people. Well, we found somebody and got a conviction, and where are they?”
Pro-life pregnancy centers have been hit with nearly 90 attacks since the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked in May 2022. Yet Ms. Kamke’s conviction is believed to be the first time a perpetrator has been successfully prosecuted.
For Mr. Harden, the resolution of the case was both heartening and a reminder of how many more attacks have gone unsolved.
“We’re very happy about that,” Mr. Harden told The Washington Times. “It’s like a ray of judicial sunshine in an otherwise very dark scenario.”
The Justice Department has not commented on Ms. Kamke, who pleaded guilty to vandalizing CompassCare shortly before midnight on March 15. She was sentenced to a one-year conditional discharge; ordered to pay restitution of $2,580, and to stay away from CompassCare.
The disorderly conduct charge was a violation, which is the equivalent of a citation and less serious than a misdemeanor, according to the Erie County District Attorney’s office. She was originally charged with criminal mischief, a class “E” felony.
Double-standard allegations
The 1994 FACT Act prohibits violence or threats “intended to injure, intimidate, or interfere with the right to seek, obtain or provide reproductive health services,” meaning that it applies to both abortion clinics and pro-life crisis centers, which offer services such as pregnancy testing and ultrasounds.
Before President Biden took office, the law was used sparingly and mainly for serious infractions, including the deadly 2015 shooting at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs, as well as attacks involving Molotov cocktails and bomb threats.
Under the Biden administration, however, the Justice Department has ramped up its use of the law, bringing more than 30 FACE Act charges against activists for obstructing access to abortion clinics, according to the Civil Rights Division.
They include eight activists convicted in August and September of FACE Act violations and felony conspiracy for the October 2020 blockade at an abortion clinic in Washington, D.C. They now face up to 11 years in prison and fines up to $350,000. A ninth defendant pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 10 months imprisonment.
“Reproductive health care providers must be free to carry out their work free from interference or intimidation,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke in an Oct. 3, 2022, statement. “The Justice Department is committed to enforcing federal law to protect providers and all people seeking access to reproductive health care across our nation.”
Meanwhile, four pro-choice activists have been charged with FACE Act violations for vandalizing pro-life pregnancy centers in Winter Haven and Hialeah, Florida. So far no prosecutions have been announced. A motion filed by defendant Amber Smith-Stewart to dismiss the charges in August was denied.
As far as conservatives are concerned, those four indictments offer a tepid response to the 88 attacks on pro-life organizations and pregnancy centers, as well as the 198 attacks on Catholic churches, since the fall of Roe v. Wade, as shown on the CatholicVote tracker.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan accused the Justice Department of a double standard, saying it was enforcing the law in a way that “robustly protects pro-abortion activists and facilities while essentially ignoring attacks on pro-life advocates, facilities, and churches.”
“You are in the best position to inform members about the politically motivated enforcement of the FACE Act and related civil rights issues,” said Mr. Jordan in the Sept. 15 letter to Ms. Clarke.
At the March 1 Senate hearing, Mr. Garland acknowledged there were “many more prosecutions” of pro-life activists, but said it was because they typically protest openly during the daytime, whereas the pro-choice activists carry out their vandalism at night.
Those on the left are also concerned about the scales of justice. The South Florida Anti-Repression Committee said the four pro-choice activists are being “unjustly and aggressively prosecuted” for what amounts to graffiti.
The defendants are accused of spray-painting messages such as “Jane’s Revenge” and “if abortions aren’t safe then neither are you.” Two of the four are also accused of damaging a video surveillance camera with lasers.
“Threatening people with 12 years in federal prison for graffiti is a shocking abuse of power, especially when anti-abortion activists harass and intimidate those seeking and providing reproductive healthcare on a daily basis with little repercussion,” said the group in a March 31 statement.
Less sanguine about such graffiti is Mr. Hansen. The threatening message on the CompassCare sign in Amherst came as a reminder of extensive damage caused by the June 2022 arson attack, which forced the company to gut the building and rebuild at a cost of $550,000.
The center reopened 52 days later. The FBI has said it is continuing to investigate the arson, but so far nobody has been arrested or prosecuted.
Rep. Chip Roy, Texas Republican, and Sen. Mike Lee, Utah Republican, introduced legislation Wednesday to scuttle the FACE Act, calling it “unconstitutional and easily weaponized.”
Mr. Hansen agreed. “I personally believe if there’s going to be a law on the books, it needs to be enforced equally, but I think the FACE Act is unconstitutional,” he said. “I think the FACE Act needs to be repealed.”
• Valerie Richardson can be reached at vrichardson@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.