Republicans seek repeal of FACE Act; Democrats say repeal would invite violence at clinics and places of worship

The House Judiciary Committee voted to report HR 589, a bill to repeal the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, after a marked partisan debate over whether the statute had been weaponized against pro‑life demonstrators.

Representative Roy (sponsor of the repeal measure in this markup) said the FACE Act had been applied disproportionately against pro‑life individuals and that the law was ripe for politicization. Rep. Roy described several cases in which defendants protesting at clinics were criminally charged and some supporters said the statute was used more often against peaceful pro‑life protesters than against violent actors targeting pregnancy resource centers or churches.

Ranking Member Raskin and other Democrats strongly opposed repeal. Raskin said the FACE Act draws a clear line between protected speech and violent obstruction or threats, and cited recent episodes of arson, bomb threats, and an alleged car bombing in California at an IVF clinic as evidence the law remains necessary. Democrats noted the statute has been repeatedly upheld by federal courts and argued repeal would leave patients, providers and places of worship with diminished federal protection against violent interference.

The committee adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute and ordered the bill to be reported favorably; the clerk recorded a committee vote of 13 ayes and 10 noes.

Why it matters: The FACE Act criminalizes the use or threat of force and physical obstruction to interfere with reproductive‑health services or the free exercise of religion at places of worship. Repeal would remove that federal tool; proponents said local authorities can still prosecute similar conduct and that the law had been selectively applied.

What’s next: The bill was ordered to be reported to the House. Supporters and opponents both said the issue would almost certainly be litigated and draw national attention.