Battle turns over San Francisco abortion measure as issue gains national momentum

San Francisco voters will consider a bill Tuesday that would further entrench abortion access in the liberal stronghold, including through a controversial provision that would require the city to post signs outside faith-based pregnancy resource centers that direct visitors to other abortion clinics. offer.

The ballot measure, called Proposition O, would require the city’s public health department to post signs outside pregnancy clinics notifying visitors that they do not offer abortions and a list of clinics that do. The proposal would also require the city to create a publicly accessible website with similar abortion-related information. The ballot measure, proposed and supported by Democratic Mayor London Breed, faces staunch opposition from Catholic groups and churches.

Although the Controller’s Office assessments the signs would cost the city up to $8,000 a year, a cost that could be higher as legal challenges are expected if the measure passes. The Supreme Court has already struck down a similar California law called the Reproductive Fact Act, which required religious pregnancy clinics to counsel women about abortion and birth control options, a likely violation of the First Amendment.

As San Francisco voters consider Tuesday’s ballot proposal, a slew of abortion-related measures are on state ballots across the country — in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New York, Nevada and South Dakota.

In the seven states that have already voted on abortion measures after repealing the law. Roe v. Wade The pro-abortion access side won all seven states in 2022, making the issue an important part of the Democratic Party’s platform as the party hopes the issue will motivate voters to turn out to the polls. Vice President Harris has ramped up his pro-life rhetoric in the weeks leading up to the election, recently holding an event in Texas to highlight the state’s strict abortion laws.

Last Presidential Campaign NBC News surveyreleased this weekend, indicates that Ms. Harris’s biggest electoral advantage is on abortion, with 53 percent of registered voters trusting her on abortion, compared with only 33 percent trusting President Trump. When it comes to other issues such as inflation and immigration, Trump leads by a wide margin.

Proposition O San Francisco also seeks to create a Reproductive Freedom Fund to support abortion services and reproductive rights, change zoning laws to allow abortion clinics to operate in more neighborhoods, and prohibit city officials from sharing information with other state or federal law enforcement agencies. . government regarding the patient’s pregnancy status or whether she will have an abortion.

Mrs. Breed, who was a strong supporter of the measure, stated in the press: conference that the city’s pregnancy centers are “misleading” vulnerable women and that the city needs to use “every resource San Francisco has” to protect abortion access. Abortion is already heavily protected in the state as it is permitted at any time before viability and “at any time” to protect the life or health of the woman. California also allows non-residents and people of any age, including minors, to legally obtain abortions.

The Catholic Church has taken a decisive stand opposing The measure, it said, would “stigmatize” pregnancy centers and put clinic staff, volunteers and clients at risk.

The Archdiocese of San Francisco argues that this is not necessary because California is already a “sanctuary state” for abortions, and says taxpayer funds should not be used to distribute signs “outside of life-affirming health and pregnancy support centers, singling them out as facilities who refuse abortions.” perform abortions and potentially expose them to abusive behavior from opponents.”

“Why doesn’t Proposition O require the city to put up signs outside abortion facilities to direct women to places where they can get help during childbirth?” This is stated in a statement from the archdiocese. “Do the authors of the proposal really believe in choice?”