Second Circuit unanimously rules against Attorney General Letitia James’s censorship of APR
Two pregnancy help centers and network of affiliated centers can inform women about Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) while their lawsuit proceeds, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled Monday.
New York Attorney General Letitia James sued 11 faith-based pregnancy centers in state court in May 2024 to quash their speech about APR. James alleges that the centers are spreading “false and misleading” information in violation of New York business fraud laws. James’s action prompted two centers, Gianna’s House and Options Care Center, along with the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), to preemptively sue in federal court.
A federal district court ruled in their favor and James then appealed to the Second Circuit. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is representing NIFLA and the two centers in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. James.
[Click here to subscribe to Pregnancy Help News!]
APR is an updated treatment used to combat miscarriage since the 1950s using a bioidentical version of progesterone, the natural hormone in a woman’s body necessary to sustain pregnancy, to counter the effects of abortion drug mifepristone.
Statistics show that to date more than 7,000 lives and counting have been saved thanks to the Abortion Pill Rescue Network.
A 2018 peer-reviewed study showed positive results with APR, including 64%-68% of the pregnancies saved, no increase in birth defects, and a lower preterm delivery rate than the general population.
James had first threatened to sue Heartbeat International and 11 centers in April 2024 over sharing information on APR. Heartbeat is the largest network of pregnancy help organizations in the U.S. and globally and manages the Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN). Heartbeat and the 11 centers, represented by Thomas More Society, sued to block her threatened legal action and James subsequently sued in early May. That case is being litigated in New York state court.
Following ADF suing James in federal court on behalf of the NIFLA and the two New York centers, Thomas More Society attorneys then filed a federal lawsuit against James on August 7, 2024, on behalf of two other New York centers.
ADF said in a statement on the Dec. 1, 2025, Second Circuit ruling that, “James is trying to censor speech about the life-saving treatment (APR) by targeting pregnancy centers based on the content and viewpoint of their speech.”
Representatives from Heartbeat International applauded the federal appeals court affirming freedom of speech related to sharing information about APR.
“This is a tremendous win for the women and families of New York,” Christa Brown BSN, RN, senior director of Medical Impact for Heartbeat International and
executive director of the APRN. “The ruling confirms that the free speech of pregnancy help medical clinics cannot be censored.”
“This case attempted to hide that Abortion Pill Reversal is a choice for women who have regret after starting a chemical abortion,” Brown said. “APR is based on well-established medical science and is safe for women and babies. Thousands of mothers have chosen life for their babies, even after taking mifepristone. No woman should ever feel her choices end when she swallows the first abortion pill. Women who start APR routinely express gratitude for those who offer them assistance and support during.”
Heartbeat’s president echoed Brown’s remarks.
"Helping moms continue their own pregnancy shouldn't require any court battles,” Jor-El Godsey said. “The Second Circuit's unanimous ruling underscores the importance of the freedom to speak the life-saving message that helps women have a second chance to choose life. We're grateful for our friends at NIFLA and ADF for fighting this good fight for moms and babies."
Tweet This: Helping moms continue their own pregnancy shouldn't require any court battles.
Editor's note: Heartbeat International manages the Abortion Pill Rescue® Network (APRN) and Pregnancy Help News. Heartbeat is currently the subject of two lawsuits brought by state AGs concerning sharing information about APR.
