Google warned against censoring pregnancy resource centers

Google warned against censoring pregnancy resource centers

Google warned against censoring pregnancy resource centers

Is Google censoring search results from pro-life pregnancy resource centers (PRCs)? Sixteen state attorneys general are determined to find out.

Joshua Arnold
Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

“We hope that Google isn’t doing it,” Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall (R) told Tony Perkins Friday on “Washington Watch.” “But what we did see, for example, the attorney general from New York calling upon Google to limit or censor the searches … looking for pregnancy centers.” More than 20 Democratic lawmakers have also urged Google to censor pregnancy resource centers.

“It certainly would not be beyond the reach, I think, of Google and other social media giants to do just that,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. It’s “not a stretch when you look at what social media has done in silencing the viewpoints that they disagree with.”

In response to the possibility, Marshall joined other state AGs in a July 21 letter countering the Left’s intimidation tactics. “We’ve made it very clear this week that to the extent that Google adopts that philosophy, we will use every mechanism available to us to be able to push back against it.”

“Has Google taken, or will Google take, any steps to treat crisis pregnancy centers any differently with regard to Google search results, Google Ads, or Google Maps than they were treated before the leak of the draft United States Supreme Court opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization? If so, what steps have you taken, or will you take?” they asked, giving Google until August 4 to respond.

“According to a 2020 study, crisis pregnancy centers served over 1.8 million clients in 2019, providing services valued at $266 million at little or no cost to their patients. These services included free ultrasounds, pregnancy tests, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, parenting and prenatal education classes, post-abortive care, and recovery counseling, and free or reduced-cost diapers, baby clothes, car seats, and strollers,” the letter argued.

Yet somehow, PRCs have become a focal point for the Left’s demented rage at the end of Roe. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called for pregnancy resource centers to be “shut down all around the country.” President Joe Biden plans to target them for fraud. “Those on the Left who are not happy about the Dobbs decision … are trying to limit the ability [of] these nonprofits who are working in a remarkable way,” said Marshall.

Somehow, it seems like the Left holds PRCs responsible for the end of abortion-on-demand. They must believe the clinics are merely fronts for a vast political network singularly focused on ending abortion — in other words, Planned Parenthood’s photo-negative.

But their spiteful campaign of vengeance betrays their own rhetoric. Pro-abortion is “pro-choice,” they claim, as they work to shut down all the choices but abortion. With the end of Roe, they claimed women with unplanned pregnancies would have no options — as they work to shut down all the options but abortion. If their goal was to manipulate, trick, and compel vulnerable women into reluctantly aborting their babies, they couldn’t have chosen a better strategy than declaring all-out war on pro-life PRCs.

The Left’s all-out war is what prompted the 16 AGs to counter their aggressive tactics with some chest-thumping of their own. With mega-corporations rolling over to Leftist pressure campaigns like so many bowling pins, they decided it was worthwhile to remind Google there are two sides to every political issue, and there comes a cost to needlessly antagonizing either one.

They argued that Google’s dominant share of search results place additional responsibilities on its conduct — unless they wanted to face anti-trust lawsuits. They argued that thumbing the scales of search results, ads, and maps would expose Google to lawsuits from a variety of angles, including free speech, free expression, and free markets.

“Google once recognized its outsized public duty in its corporate motto ‘don’t be evil’ and in its commitment to ‘providing our users unbiased access to information,’” the AGs wrote. “Google’s search results must not be subject to left-wing political pressure, which would actively harm women seeking essential assistance.”

Does Google hold its “don’t be evil” motto any longer? With respect to PRCs, we’ll find out shortly.

The article originally appeared here.

Notice: This column is printed with permission. Opinion pieces published by AFN.net are the sole responsibility of the article's author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of the staff or management of, or advertisers who support the American Family News Network, AFN.net, our parent organization or its other affiliates.