Proactive Policy on Abortion Access

Passing & Protecting New York’s Reproductive Health Act

For more than 10 years, NIRH and the NIRH Action Fund led the advocacy campaign to educate the public, rally New Yorkers, and convince elected officials to update New York’s laws by passing the Reproductive Health Act.

Massachusetts Passes State Decriminalization Bill Safeguarding Abortion Access

On July 18, 2018, the Massachusetts legislature passed long-overdue proactive legislation to decriminalize abortion. This win is significant because it overturns archaic statutes that have been used to prosecute women who self-manage their own abortions. With this win, Massachusetts pushed back against a hostile anti-choice federal landscape, and laid the groundwork to push even further to […]

Stopping Fake Clinics’ Deceptive Practices in Hartford, CT

In 2017, NIRH supported a partnership between NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut and Hartford GYN Center, a long standing health care provider in the Hartford community, to educate and mobilize a grassroots base about the harms caused by so-called crisis pregnancy centers or fake women’s health centers in their community. This was based in part on a […]

Passing a Clinic Protection Law in Columbus, OH

In June 2016, the Columbus, OH City Council unanimously passed the “Healthcare Workers and Patient Protection Ordinance.” The measure establishes a 15-foot zone around clinics, within which there are enhanced penalties for engaging in “disorderly conduct.” This ordinance also prohibits obstruction of clinic entrances and premises, and prohibits conduct within the buffer zone that “places […]

Passing a Clinic Protection Law in Pittsburgh, PA

In 2005, the city of Pittsburgh passed an ordinance that created a 15-foot fixed buffer zone and an 8-foot floating zone around abortion clinics. However, a court ruled in 2009 while either option would be constitutional on its own, the city could not enforce both zones simultaneously. After discussion with
key stakeholders, Pittsburgh elected to keep […]

Regulating Fake Clinics in San Francisco, CA

In 2010, NARAL Pro-Choice California released a report detailing the deceptive practices of fake clinics entitled “Unmasking Fake Clinics: the Truth about Crisis Pregnancy Centers in California.” In 2011, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance prohibiting fake clinics from making misleading statements or posting deceptive advertisements about their services. First Resort Inc., […]

Regulating Fake Clinics in New York City

In 2010, NIRH Action Fund released a report on the deceptive practices of CPCs in New York entitled “’She Said Abortion Could Cause Breast Cancer’: A Report on the Lies, Manipulations, and Privacy Violations of Crisis Pregnancy Centers in New York City,” based on an undercover investigation they conducted with several volunteers. The following year, […]

Passing a Clinic Safety Ordinance in San Francisco, CA

In 2013, San Francisco enacted an ordinance that created a fixed 25-foot buffer zone around reproductive health facilities. After the McCullen decision, elected officials worked with Planned Parenthood and the City Attorney’s Office to create a new ordinance more likely to withstand a constitutional challenge. The new ordinance, passed unanimously by the City Board of Supervisors in […]

Regulating Fake Clinics in Baltimore and Montgomery County, MD

In 2008, NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland released a report entitled “The Truth Revealed: Maryland Crisis Pregnancy Center Investigations” that highlighted the deceptive practices of fake clinics in the state. The following year, the Baltimore City Council passed an ordinance requiring fake clinics to disclose whether or not they provide or make referrals for abortion or contraception […]

Reinforcing New York City’s 2009 Clinic Safety Ordinance

In response to anti-choice harassment outside of many of the city’s clinics, the New York City Council passed a clinic safety ordinance in 2009. The ordinance prohibits people following and harassing others within 15 feet of a reproductive health clinic. This law was cited in McCullen v. Coakley as an example of a less burdensome, and more narrowly tailored, clinic protection measure. […]