The FACE Act is a weird, incredibly unjust law. I've gone to jail for it

A group of anti-ICE protestors entered Cities Church in St. Paul, Minn., and disrupted the service on Jan. 18, chanting anti-ICE slogans and berating congregants for tolerating the arrest of illegal immigrants in the Twin Cities.  The next day, conservative media was aflame with outrage, and now there is talk that President Trump’s DOJ will charge the protestors with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.

That got my attention, and not in a good way. I’m one of only a few dozen people in America who have ever been convicted of FACE.  In 2022, in retaliation for a peaceful anti-abortion rescue that I was accused of organizing, President Joe Biden’s DOJ arrested me at gunpoint and charged me with FACE and Conspiracy to Deny Rights (a possible 11-year sentence). In 2023, along with nine others, I was tried and immediately sent to federal prison. I would have served up to 34 months had President Trump not pardoned all of us one year ago. This is what these protesters are looking at, should Trump decide to invoke FACE.

You might think I’d be happy to see him do that. But you’d be wrong.  

The FACE Act is a weird, incredibly unjust law. It makes it a federal crime to injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone trying to obtain “reproductive health services” (i.e., abortion) or anyone attending a “place of religious worship,” and imposes outrageous sentences on violators. It was created by pro-abortion Democrats to crush the rescue movement of the 1980s and early 1990s, when thousands of pro-life people were peacefully blockading the doors of abortion clinics and saving countless lives. The church provision, I believe, was added to placate conservatives in Congress, which it did.  Thirty-four Republican traitors, including Sens. Mitch McConnell and Arlen Specter, joined Democrats to pass FACE by sizable majorities in both houses. It was perhaps the biggest betrayal of human life ever perpetrated by American politicians.  

Ever since I got involved in anti-abortion rescue, I’ve supported the repeal of FACE. This is because I sincerely believe that rescue, besides being one of the most authentic ways possible to love individual preborn children, is also a vital tool to create social tension and end child-killing as fast as possible. The original rescue movement was the closest we ever came to actually abolishing abortion, and if we ever hope to reach that goal, rescue must revive. But FACE, especially coupled with the conspiracy statutes that pro-abortion prosecutors love to slam rescuers with, makes rescue almost impossible for all but the most steel-willed among us.  

That’s why, before I was incarcerated, I spoke out against mainstream pro-life groups who were merely calling for FACE to be enforced equally against the pro-abortion vandals who were then desecrating and damaging pregnancy resource centers. While in prison, I spent weeks writing articles about how important it was that we get rid of FACE, not just use it to bash our enemies.  

After he pardoned us, President Trump promised to only enforce the FACE Act in “extraordinary circumstances,” and we were hopeful that before he was out of office, Republicans in Congress would have repealed that diabolical law. But instead, the bill to repeal FACE was tabled in committee. Then, pro-Palestinian protesters demonstrated outside a New York City synagogue, and now we have the Minnesota church incident. Once again, people on “my side” are salivating over the possibility of using FACE to punish those we don’t like.  

Their anger, perhaps, is justified. Personally, my opinions about Trump’s deportation policy are not very strong. But I think I know the type of people who invaded Cities Church, and I despise them. It was violent left-wing villains like that who, on multiple occasions, assaulted my friends and me during anti-abortion outreach, stole and destroyed our equipment, screamed in our faces, and attempted to damage our eardrums with their police whistles. If they weren’t protesting inside a church, they would probably be escorting women into Planned Parenthood, dancing naked in front of Christian evangelists at a Pride Parade, or holding sheets in front of our abortion victim images while singing about how hungry the bloody photo of a murdered child made them feel. They are truly the worst of the worst.

But the desire for revenge must not be allowed to cloud our judgment. If FACE remains in effect, these people lose the freedom to frighten Christians on Sunday morning. We lose the ability to save lives.  

Besides all this, I’m just not a fan of overzealous prosecution. Offensive as these church protesters may have behaved, so far as I know, they did not physically hurt anyone. What they did that day was trespass and probably qualifies as harassment. Maybe even assault. We already have laws against that, and those laws can be enforced. But it simply isn’t just to send them to prison for multiple years. The punishment should fit the crime. Having been a victim of exaggerated, ideologically motivated prosecution, I have a hard time calling for it to be used against others. Sure, part of me would delight in seeing “their side” get a dose of their own medicine. But these are people we’re talking about, not punching bags.

Some might suggest that if FACE is used against Democratic activists, there will be bipartisan support for repealing it as soon as possible. Yet this presumes that Democratic power brokers care more about harassing churches than protecting the abortion industry. I seriously doubt that. They know where their bread is buttered. Our hope of revoking FACE lies with the Republicans, and now I fear they will become FACE’s biggest supporters.  

The real problem, as always, is that most conservatives, and indeed most pro-lifers, are more worried about this potential threat to their safe spaces than the very real mass slaughter of preborn children. Or at least they see no value in rescue. Yes, what happened on Jan. 18 was horrendous. But to hamstring the fight against child killing just so we can live more securely is not pro-life at all.