American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Pregnancy Resource Centers, available at <http://www.aaplog.org/pregnancy-resource-centers/> (last visited February 4, 2015) (“Pregnancy Resource Centers (Crisis Pregnancy Centers) have been called the kind, calm, nonjudgmental face of the pro-life movement… They provide life-saving help in a truly life-changing way by assisting women who are at risk for abortion with the life-affirming, practical support they need to choose life, then prepare them to parent or to place for adoption.”).
3.
LinV.DailardC., “The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, Crisis Pregnancy Centers Seek to Increase Political Clout, Secure Government Subsidy,” available at <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/05/2/gr050204.html> (last visited February 4, 2015).
4.
JonesR.KooistraK., “Abortion Incidence and Access to Services in the United States, 2008,”Perspective in Sexual and Reproductive Health43, no. 1 (2011): 41–50.
U.S. House of Representatives, “False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers,”2006, available at <http://www.chsourcebook.com/articles/waxman2.pdf> (last visited March 4, 2015).
JonesR.KooistraK., “Abortion Incidence and Access to Services in the United States, 2008,”Perspectives on Sexual Reproductive Health43, no. 1 (2011): 41–50.
SchenkerY.MeiselA., “Informed Consent in Clinical Care: Practical Considerations in the Effort to Achieve Ethical Goals,”JAMA305, no. 11 (2011): 1130–1131.
Evergreen Ass'n, Inc. v. City of New York, 740 F.3d 233 (2014).
31.
KeighleyJ., “Can You Handle the Truth? Compelled Commercial Speech and the First Amendment,”Journal of Constitutional Law15, no. 2 (2012): 539–617, at 588.
32.
683 F.3d 539 nRehearing en Banc Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 4th Cir.(Md.), July 3, 2013.
33.
O'Brien v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 768 F. Supp. 2d 804, 813 (D. Md. 2011) aff'd sub nom.
34.
Greater Baltimore Ctr. for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 683 F.3d 539 (4th Cir. 2012) on reh'g en banc, 721 F.3d 264 (4th Cir. 2013) and aff'd in part, vacated in part, remanded sub nom.
35.
Greater Baltimore Ctr. for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 721 F.3d 264 (4th Cir. 2013).
36.
Rehearing en Banc Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 4th Cir. (Md.), July 3, 2013.
37.
Rehearing en Banc Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 4th Cir. (Md.), July 3, 2013.
38.
Ordinance 10–9, City Council of the City of Austin (2010).
39.
Ordinance 10–10, City Council of the City of Austin (2012).
40.
Id.
41.
Montgomery County Resolution Number16–252 (2010).
42.
Tepeyac v. Montgomery Cnty., 779 F. Supp. 2d 456, 468 (D. Md. 2011)
43.
aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 683 F.3d 591 (4th Cir. 2012) on reh'g en banc sub nom.
44.
Centro Tepeyac v. Montgomery Cnty., 722 F.3d 184 (4th Cir. 2013) and aff'd sub nom.
45.
Centro Tepeyac v. Montgomery Cnty., 722 F.3d 184 (4th Cir. 2013).
46.
Centro Tepeyac v. Montgomery Cnty., 722 F.3d 184, 189 (4th Cir. 2013).
47.
Local Law 17 § 2 (2011).
48.
Evergreen Ass'n, Inc. v. City of New York, 740 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2014).
49.
Evergreen Ass'n, Inc. v. City of New York, 801 F. Supp. 2d 197, 205 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)
50.
aff'd in part, vacated in part, 740 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2014).
51.
Evergreen Ass'n, Inc. v. City of New York, 740 F.3d 233 (2014).
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 872 (1992).
54.
Id.
55.
Id.
56.
Carhart v. Gonzales, 550 U.S. (2007).
57.
Id.
58.
Brief of Sandra Cano, the Former “Mary Doe” of Doe v. Bolton, et al. Carhart v. Gonzales, 550 U.S. (2007).
59.
BorgmannC., “Abortion, the Undue Burden Standard, and the Evisceration of Women's Privacy,”William & Mary Journal of Women and Law16, no. 2 (2009): 291–325, at 291;.
AhmedA., “Medical Evidence and Expertise in Abortion Jurisprudence,”American Journal of Law and Medicine (forthcoming 2015).
62.
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds, United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. July 24, 2012686 F.3d 889.
63.
Texas Medical Providers Performing Abortion Services v. Lakey, 667 F.3d 570, 578 (2012).
64.
SiegalR., “Dignity and the Politics of Protection: Abortion Restrictions Under Casey/Carhart,”Yale Law Journal117 (2008): 1695–1800 at 1698.
65.
N.C. Gen. Stat. §§90–21.80 through 90–21.92 (2011).
66.
Gretchen v. Huff, No. 1:11CV804, (D.N.C. filed Dec. 19, 2011).
67.
Texas Medical Providers Performing Abortion Services v. Lakey, 667 F.3d 570, 578 (2012).
68.
Texas Medical Providers Performing Abortion Services v. Lakey, 667 F.3d 570, 578 (2012);
69.
See, also, PostR., “Informed Consent to Abortion: A First Amendment Analysis of Compelled Physician Speech,”University of Illinois Law Review2007, no. 3 (2007): 939–990, at 944.
A search in Westlaw for law reviews reveals a much larger swath of articles with approximately 119 at mentioning CPCs.
74.
RosenJ. D., “The Public Health Risks of Crisis Pregnancy Centers,”Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health44, no. 3 (2012): 201–205, at 202.
75.
JoyceT.HenshawS.DennisA., “The Impact of State Mandatory Counseling and Waiting Period Laws on Abortion: A Literature Review,” The Guttmacher Institute, 2009, available at <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/MandatoryCounseling.pdf> (last visited March 4, 2015).