{"id":36752,"date":"2023-01-30T04:51:20","date_gmt":"2023-01-30T04:51:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cjstudents.com\/?p=36752"},"modified":"2023-01-30T04:51:20","modified_gmt":"2023-01-30T04:51:20","slug":"bidens-justice-department-indicts-pro-choice-vandals-rolling-stone","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cjstudents.com\/index.php\/2023\/01\/30\/bidens-justice-department-indicts-pro-choice-vandals-rolling-stone\/","title":{"rendered":"Biden\u2019s Justice Department Indicts Pro-Choice Vandals \u2013 Rolling Stone"},"content":{"rendered":"

[ad_1]<\/p>\n

\n

\n\tJane\u2019s Revenge\u2019s \u201cfirst communiqu\u00e9<\/a>\u201d was posted online on May 8, the same day the empty headquarters of an anti-abortion<\/a> group, Wisconsin Family Action, were set on fire, and a few days after a draft of the Supreme Court<\/a>\u2019s decision overturning Roe<\/em> was leaked publicly. A message was left on the building in curling cursive spray paint: \u2018If abortions aren\u2019t safe then you aren\u2019t either.\u2019\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tFox News quickly turned the \u201cpro-choice extremist group Jane\u2019s Revenge\u201d into a recurring fixture of its on-air coverage. Facebook branded<\/a> the group a \u201cTier 1\u201d Dangerous Organization \u2014\u00a0the designation typically reserved for terrorists, hate groups and criminal syndicates.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tIt was an impressive level of outrage considering the incidents themselves, more of which followed throughout the summer and fall, amounted to relatively superficial property damage. At the moment, the FBI is seeking information related to 10 instances of arson and vandalism at anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers around the country. As a point of comparison, in 2021 alone, abortion providers reported 123 incidents of vandalism, 123 incidents of assault or battery, 28 stalking incidents, 16 invasions, 13 burglaries and 9 bomb threats, according to statistics kept by the National Abortion Federation. (To take a longer view, there have been 11 murders, 42 bombings, 196 arsons, 491 assaults in facilities that provide abortion care since 1977<\/a>, per the group\u2019s tally.)<\/p>\n

\n\tAs a rightwing bogeyman, though, Jane\u2019s Revenge has proved surprisingly potent: The new House GOP, in one of its first official acts, passed a resolution<\/a> condemning \u201cthe recent attacks on pro-life facilities, groups, and churches.\u201d (Republican leadership refused to allow a vote on a separate measure, offered by Democrats<\/a>, that would condemn violence against both crisis pregnancy centers and facilities that provide abortion.)<\/p>\n

\n\tNow, Fox News\u2019 devoted coverage of Jane\u2019s Revenge and a conservative<\/a> pressure campaign<\/a> on Merrick Garland seem to be getting results. Last week, the FBI announced a $25,000 reward for more information about the incidents. Two days after that, the Department of Justice announced both the first arrests of individuals implicated in the spate of incidents for which Jane\u2019s Revenge has taken credit<\/a> \u2014 and the fact that prosecutors intend to use a law aimed at protecting abortion access to prosecute them.<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\tEditor\u2019s picks<\/p>\n<\/h2>\n<\/section>\n

\n\tThis week, the DOJ announced indictments against Caleb Freestone, 27, and Amber Smith-Stewart, 23. Freestone and Smith-Stewart are accused of vandalizing three Florida crisis pregnancy centers: the Archdiocese of Miami\u2019s \u2018Respect Life\u2019 facility in Hollywood, the Pregnancy Help Medical Clinics in Hialeah, and LifeChoice Pregnancy Center in Winter Haven. All three offer free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds, and counsel women against terminating their pregnancies. Prosecutors accuse Freestone and Smith-Stewart of conspiring \u201cto injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate employees of facilities providing reproductive health services.\u201d (Freestone and Smith-Stewart could not be reached for comment; Alex Saiz, the lawyer currently representing both of them in a separate protesting case, told Rolling Stone<\/em> he would advise his clients not to speak about the case publicly.)<\/p>\n

\n\tIronically, the accused will now be prosecuted under the Freedom to Access Clinic Entrances Act: a law intended to protect access to reproductive health services. The FACE Act was passed in 1994, in the wake of large-scale clinic blockades<\/a> organized by the militant group Operation Rescue, when hundreds of anti-abortion protesters would gather to physically block the paths of patients trying to enter health care facilities.<\/p>\n

\n\tIf it seems like a perverse misuse of a law intended to protect health care providers from the very real threats of violence they face for providing abortions, Julie Abbate, former deputy chief of special litigation with the DOJ\u2019s Civil Rights Division says it\u2019s not. \u201cIt\u2019s really a content-neutral law.\u00a0It doesn\u2019t take viewpoint into consideration,\u201d says Abbate, who prosecuted FACE Act violations during her 15-year tenure at DOJ.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\tRelated<\/p>\n<\/h2>\n<\/section>\n

\n\tThe law itself is a both-side-sy piece of legislation: In addition to language that explicitly protects facilities that provide abortions, the law also protects against blockades in front of \u201cplaces of worship\u201d \u2014 a provision that was added to broaden political support for the bill.( And a provision that came in handy when prosecutors were later forced to defend it: \u201cOne of the main ways that we used to defend the constitutionality of the FACE Act itself was by saying it\u2019s content neutral,\u201d Abbate says.)<\/p>\n

\n\tAbbate says she is only aware of one other case in which the FACE Act has previously been used against a crisis pregnancy center. But that is not for a lack of interest on prosecutors\u2019 part. \u201cAny case that we found that we thought we could prove violated the FACE Act, we would absolutely try to bring that case,\u201d Abbate says. \u201cAbsolutely. Without question, regardless of who the people were, or what their viewpoint was or where they were, whether it was a abortion clinic, crisis pregnancy center, or place of worship.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\tTrending<\/p>\n<\/h2>\n<\/section>\n

\n\tWhen she was at the DOJ, Abbate says, her team actively sought any cases they thought qualified as FACE Act violations, including against crisis pregnancy centers and places of worship \u2014 at the time, GOP senators like Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT) pressed<\/a> the DOJ to do do \u2014\u00a0but there just weren\u2019t as many reports of incidents at those locations. In that sense, at least, Jane\u2019s Revenge seems to have finally given Republicans what they wanted.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n\tJust don\u2019t expect this case to mean the GOP will embrace the law. The same week the DOJ announced the Florida indictments, Biden administration lawyers were in court in Philadelphia to present arguments in a different FACE Act trial: A prominent anti-abortion activist Mark Houck is standing trial accused of assaulting a 72-year-old clinic escort outside a Planned Parenthood<\/a> Philadelphia. Houck\u2019s prosecution has transformed into a cause c\u00e9l\u00e8bre on the right, with Jim Jordan already suggesting he intends to make the case a focal point of the House GOP\u2019s new select committee on the \u201cweaponization of government.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n