Vermont has amended a 2023 law following criticism from pro-life pregnancy centers that claimed the regulation unfairly restricted their ability to support women through non-abortion services and advocacy.

According to the Christian Post, the updated measure has led to a lawsuit dismissal by pro-life groups that alleged the original statute infringed on free speech and selectively targeted their work.

Senate Bill 37, initially approved by Vermont lawmakers and signed into law in May 2023, aimed to regulate how limited-service pregnancy centers advertised their services. These facilities, which do not offer abortion procedures or emergency contraception, were defined under the law as “limited-services” centers.

The original bill authorized penalties up to $10,000 for centers deemed to have issued advertisements considered misleading by state officials. State leaders insisted the regulation was necessary to prevent what they considered deceptive communication from clinics that did not provide a comprehensive range of reproductive services.

Critics of the statute, including several pro-life organizations, argued that the law amounted to viewpoint discrimination. They said it placed undue legal and financial pressure on centers whose mission is to provide alternatives to abortion through counseling, material aid, and prenatal services.

Legal Challenge Filed Against State Authorities

In July 2023, a lawsuit titled National Institute of Family and Life Advocates et al v. Clark et al was filed in response to SB 37. The plaintiffs included the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), Aspire Now, and the Branches Pregnancy Resource Center.

The groups alleged that the law limited their capacity to communicate freely about available services, especially when discussing emotionally sensitive or medically debated topics. They also took issue with requirements that some non-medical information or services could only be delivered by licensed healthcare providers.

According to the complaint, the law did not give enough clarity on how disputed claims would be judged, arguing that the ambiguity made it challenging to draft compliant materials. They claimed the measure threatened their core outreach programs and ability to serve clients effectively.

Activists from Both Sides Respond to Law Change

On Thursday, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a legal group representing the plaintiffs, filed a stipulated dismissal of the lawsuit following amendments to the law. These recent changes by state lawmakers led to the end of the legal challenge without a court ruling.

In response to the revisions, Julia Payne Koon, legal counsel at ADF, said her clients were “pleased” that Vermont recognized the law needed to be corrected. She said this change protected the centers' ability to “speak and act” based on their values.

Koon added that women facing unplanned pregnancies should be informed of all their choices, including emotional aid and community support, which she said these centers provide as part of their mission.

Updated Law Seen as Desescalation by Pro-Life Advocates

Anne O’Connor, vice president of legal affairs at NIFLA, noted that the adjustments to the statute indicated a retreat from what she described as an "attack" on pro-life organizations. She emphasized that her group would remain vigilant should similar legal issues arise again.

“Pregnancy centers are no longer under direct threat from the law and pro-abortion lobby in Vermont,” said O’Connor. “For this, NIFLA celebrates; however, if in the future the state again decides to unconstitutionally pursue the work of pro-life pregnancy centers, NIFLA stands ready to take Vermont back to court and seek appropriate relief.”

Jean Marie Davis, head of the Branches Pregnancy Resource Center, which was also a plaintiff in the lawsuit, called the legislative developments a positive step. She stressed that centers should be free to offer help to women without fear of what she characterized as “government punishment.”

Pro-Life Centers Highlight National Impact

Supporters of the pregnancy centers often point to recent studies to underline the community services offered by these organizations. A 2024 report released by the Charlotte Lozier Institute highlighted that over 2,750 such centers are in operation nationwide.

According to the report, in 2022, these facilities provided more than $367 million in goods and services, including maternity and baby supplies, ultrasounds, parenting education, and counseling. Nearly all clients reported a positive experience, with satisfaction levels at over 97%.

These data play a central role in the arguments made by pro-life advocates, who say their services are unfairly restricted under regulations initially drafted to focus on abortion access.

State Adjustments Bring Temporary Closure

While full details of the legislative changes have not been publicly specified, the new language in SB 37 appears to have addressed some of the lawsuit’s main concerns. By softening its previous requirements, Vermont has avoided a court decision on the statute’s constitutionality.

For now, tensions over the future of similar laws in Vermont and other states remain high. Pro-life organizations remain on alert, while lawmakers balance regulating health-related messaging with protecting First Amendment rights.

This development in Vermont may set a precedent for how other states craft or revise policies regarding reproductive health communication, particularly where free speech and public service intersect in complex ways.