A federal jury, seated in Detroit, Michigan, has found seven pro-life defendants guilty of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE Act, according to a Daily Wire story that described the 11-day trial.
Those convicted have been identified as Chester Gallagher; Heather Idoni; Joel Curry; Justin Phillips, Cal Zastrow; his daughter Eva Zastrow; and 89-year-old Eva Edl.
The pro-life activists were charged after they held a peaceful demonstration four years ago outside an abortion clinic, Northland Family Planning Clinic, located in Sterling Heights, Michigan, according to The Daily Wire.
The case was overseen by Judge Matthew Leitman, an Obama appointee.
Steve Crampton is an attorney for Thomas More Society, a religious liberty law firm that represented Gallagher (pictured at right) during the trial. He says Gallagher and others “engaged in conduct” that obstructed the entrance and thus they likely violated the FACE Act.
“The problem comes with, in our view,” he tells AFN, “the continued constitutionality of the FACE Act after the reversal of Roe v Wade in the Dobbs decision two years ago."
In more simple terms, Thomas More’s legal argument is the FACE Act became law under the premise abortion is a constitutional right. The landmark Dobbs decision ruled it is not, and it never was, so Thomas More attorneys argue that makes the FACE Act unconstitutional.
A second legal argument from Thomas More is over the U.S. Department of Justice and a felony charge called Conspiracy Against Rights. That statue dates back to 1870, Crampton says, because it was passed to punish the Klu Klux Klan for violating the voting rights of black Americans.
The U.S. Justice Department is now using that federal law, ironically, Crampton says, to violate the free speech rights and free exercise rights of protesting pro-lifers.
Thomas More is "absolutely" planning an appeal for Gallagher based on those two legal arguments, Crampton advises.
Before the Thomas More attorneys get to the appeal phase, Crampton says Judge Leitman is doing an “excellent job” of evaluating Thomas More’s legal arguments over the Dobbs ruling and the original intent of the 1870 law.
In the Daily Wire story, the reporter describes how Judge Leitman stopped Davie Peters, an attorney for one of the defendants, when he tried to bring up original intent of the 1870 law. After the defense objected, the judge cleared the courtroom then warned Peters was going “way over the line” and was close to being held in contempt.
“This lawsuit never should have been filed,” Crampton argues. “The untold hundreds of thousands of dollars of resources, and time wasted on pursuing gentle Christians for acts that took place four years ago, were a tragedy and a travesty, and misuse of federal funds."
