More News

Critics of a proposed bill to force Montgomery County pregnancy centers to include caveats on information they provide are raising constitutional concerns.

Under the bill, sponsored by Councilwoman Duchy Trachtenberg (D-At large) of North Bethesda, pregnancy centers that do not provide abortions or refer clients for abortions would have to tell women that they are not providing medical advice.

Carole Buchanan, executive director of Birthright of Montgomery County, a pregnancy center that would be required to offer disclaimers to clients, said the proposed legislation would "intimidate our clients" and "infringe" on our rights.

Critics say the legislation restricts free speech.

Trachtenberg and other supporters say the bill is intended to caution women that the information they receive at so-called "limited service pregnancy centers" might not be accurate.

Constitutional law professor Mark A. Graber, who has no involvement with the Montgomery County bill, says the measure does not infringe on constitutional rights.

There are no "free speech issues" in asking the pregnancy centers to provide truthful information to clients, he said.

"All we're asking people to do is be honest," said Graber, who teaches at the University of Maryland, College Park. "Service providers must speak truthfully."

Montgomery County has four limited service pregnancy centers, but only three would be subject to the new rule, Trachtenberg said. The Rockville Pregnancy Center, which is a licensed medical clinic, would be excluded from the bill.

Pregnancy center employees who do not offer disclaimers could be subject to a fine of up to $500 for each offense.

However, representatives from the pregnancy centers say they are nonprofit charities that offer free, valuable services, counseling and information to women in need.

Buchanan, of Birthright, was one of more than 250 people to attend a public hearing on the legislation Dec. 1.

She called the bill a "complication and red tape between a distraught woman and a counselor who only wants to listen."

Other centers that would be affected by the bill are Centro Tepeyac in Silver Spring and Shady Grove Pregnancy Center in Gaithersburg.

Trachtenberg's legislation is supported by Planned Parenthood groups, NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland and others.

Representatives of all four limited service pregnancy centers spoke during the public hearing. When questioned, none said they had received complaints from clients about false information.

Sen. Jennie M. Forehand (D-Dist. 17) of Rockville, Del. Anne R. Kaiser (D-Dist. 14) of Burtonsville and Del. Roger Manno (D-Dist. 19) of Silver Spring all testified in favor of Trachtenberg's bill.

Manno introduced a similar bill in the General Assembly in 2008 that failed to generate much traction.

"I think there's a lot of questions on both sides of the issue," said Councilman George L. Leventhal.

Leventhal chairs the Health and Human Services Committee that was scheduled to take up the bill this week. That discussion has been moved to January, he said, but not because of issues surrounding the bill.

"I co-sponsored [the bill], and I am concerned that women in crisis should not be misled or intimidated," he said. "The question is, how much power does county government have to prevent those outcomes?"

Leventhal (D-At large) of Takoma Park said the County Council is seeking advice from the county attorney on the bill.

Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Dist. 20) of Takoma Park compared the legislation to Maryland's regulation of the unauthorized practice of law.

"The state will regulate and criminalize people who pretend to be practicing law without a license," said Raskin, a professor of constitutional law at American University in Washington, D.C. "Arguably, this is an attempt to regulate the unauthorized practice of medicine."

However, Raskin said the bill's success might hinge on whether there is actual fraud taking place at the centers.

"Are they confusing women?" he said. "And are they confusing women about the nature of the service being provided? If in fact there is no fraud or confusion involved in these centers, it's a much tougher case to make." 

A bill similar to the one being proposed in Montgomery County recently passed in Baltimore city. A legal opinion on that bill from the city's Department of Law states, "Local governments may constitutionally regulate businesses, occupations and trade in the interest of public health, welfare or morals [if] such regulation does not impair the constitutional right to pursue a lawful occupation."

The American Civil Liberties Union's Maryland chapter declined to comment on the Montgomery County bill, and officials in the ACLU's national headquarters were aware of the bill, but unable to respond by deadline.