Fifty abortion-rights advocates gathered today on the corner of Madison and South Michigan Avenue to protest what they and their signage characterized as ‘fake’ abortion clinics. Their immediate focus was on Aid for Women, located two doors south at 8 South Michigan Avenue.

I will leave to others to decide whether this clinic deserves the moniker ‘fake,’ but it seemingly aims to dissuade women from having abortions. One animated video embedded in Aid for Women’s website shows a baby being removed from the womb literally body part by body part.

As far as I can tell, the organization does not offer abortion services. Instead, it offers pregnancy tests and ultrasound exams, confidential consultations, abortion pill reversals, and support programs, including a “one-on-one mentor program, pregnancy and parenting classes, moms-to-be groups, men’s support and baby boutique program[s].” The organization also operates two maternity homes. According to the site, “All services are offered FREE OF CHARGE.” Their approach: Well think of one of the many pharmaceutical ads on TV. Rather than spending 50 seconds playing up the benefits of the drug and 10 seconds describing the side effects, imagine, flipping the time allocation, with 50 seconds being spent on side effects and alternatives. The video I watched played up what could go wrong if someone had an abortion, and devoted no time acknowledging that abortion is viewed by many, including many medical professionals, as an acceptable option to an unwanted pregnancy.

Based on the website verbiage, someone seeking an abortion is not going to receive one at one of these clinics, which is why the demonstrators on the street were willing to stand in drizzly weather to callout Aid for Women and similar organizations.

I had only a passing knowledge of these clinics before today’s demonstration, but was surprised by their prevalence. One speaker indicated that there were 97 such clinics operating in Illinois, which surprisingly is three times the number of abortion clinics, according to that speaker’s count.

On June 9, 2023, the Illinois General Assembly sent SB 1909 to Governor Pritzker. I am a bit surprised that he has yet to sign it, but I assume that he eventually will. The terms of the bill prohibit a limited services pregnancy center from using or employing any deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, or misrepresentation, or the concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact, with the intent that others rely upon the concealment, suppression or omission of such material fact: to interfere with an individual seeking to gain entry or access to a provider of abortion or emergency contraception; to induce an individual to enter or access the limited services pregnancy center; in advertising, soliciting, or otherwise offering pregnancy-related services; or in conducting, providing, or performing pregnancy-related services.

The bill permits the Illinois Attorney General to enforce the Act. Penalties for violation include preliminary or permanent injunction and a civil penalty not to exceed $50,000. Moreover. the bill permits any one aggrieved by a violation to bring an action against any limited services pregnancy center that has violated the act. The plaintiff can sue for actual damages and any other relief the court deems proper.

Given the current environment, enforcement action and civil suits are likely once the bill is enacted into law. At that point, I will not be surprised if the first clinic accused of violating the law claims that the law is unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds, which means back to the United States Supreme Court.

Probably the most interesting speaker was the woman who recounted trying to get an abortion as a New York City teenager back in the Seventies. What shocks her even today is that in New York City, of all places, she managed to find a clinic that was designed to impede abortion efforts. Apparently, ‘fake’ clinics are not a recent phenomenon. A number of other speakers recounted similar stories, which included a now vilified boyfriend with a mullet; instructions two weeks in a row to return the following week because the clinic did not have abortion pills in stock, and one woman’s choice to eschew birth control for pleasure because as a Catholic, she didn’t want to commit two sins at the same time..

After the speeches wrapped up, the group proceeded in high spirits down Madison, snaking its way through the Loop, and then walking north on Michigan Avenue until it returned to the starting spot. Here I take issue with the group’s leaders. The police ordered the marchers onto the sidewalk, but they ignored the order—I heard that order and temporarily stepped to the curb until it became apparent that the police had conceded the issue.

I assume the organizers had obtained a permit because the demonstration was listed on a site that tracks demonstration activity, but I wonder whether the permit anticipated or covered a march through the streets.

Based on my now considerable experience observing demonstrations in the downtown area, if the group is small, the police require the marchers to stay on the sidewalk. The Ukrainians, who had far more people last weekend and during prior demonstrations, have always been confined to the sidewalk.

When there is a march in the street, the police use a brigade of bicycle cops to guide the marchers and block off streets. There was no sign of a large contingency of bicycle cops waiting for the march to start, as is typically the case. Based on the body language of several police officers, they were caught by surprise. They were not pleased.

Nevertheless, there were no arrests. Instead, within a block or two of the start, police reinforcements arrived on the scene—more bicycle cops showed up, as did three or four police vehicles.

Members of the public undoubtedly have legitimate beefs with the police—the incidents involving George Floyd and others come to mind—but in the case demonstrations, kudos to CPD in recent years. They exhibit neutrality; their core mission is traffic management and assuring demonstrator safety.

Afterwards, I spoke to the organizer, suggesting that visually their efforts would be far more effective if they got rid of the “fury” microphone,” which I pointed out obscures faces and emotions, and makes the speaker look like they are holding a rabbit. One of my fellow photographers who was standing next to me raised both hands in fists, and simply exclaimed, “Yes.”

Overall, the demonstration was educationally useful, but unfortunately, it was a blemished effort.

[Click on an Image to Enlarge It]

Copyright 2023, Jack B. Siegel, All Rights Reserved. Do Not Alter, Copy, Download, Display, Distribute, or Reproduce Without the Prior Written Consent of the Copyright Holder.