On April 28, the House Committee on the Judiciary convened a hearing on the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, following a Department of Justice report alleging FACE was “weaponized” under the Biden administration. Subcommittee chair Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who introduced legislation to repeal FACE in January, presided.
Enacted in 1994, FACE has been instrumental in countering antiabortion violence. The law prohibits the use of physical force, threats of force, or physical obstruction intended to injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone obtaining or providing reproductive health services. The DOJ report claims that FACE enforcement was politically motivated and outlines steps the Trump administration is taking to “rectify these wrongs,” including pardoning 23 antiabortion extremists convicted under the Biden DOJ and sharply limiting future enforcement.
Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.) pushed back forcefully on Republican efforts to repeal the law, warning that doing so ignores ongoing threats against providers and patients:
“No matter how many times the enemies of reproductive rights try to rewrite history or drum up new conspiracies about the FACE Act, the facts stay the same. We continue to see criminal obstruction of and threats of intimidation and violence against abortion providers and women seeking those services, and the FACE Act is needed now as much as it has ever been.”
Scanlon criticized the DOJ report as misleading and unsupported by evidence:
“Trump’s Department of Justice issued a report claiming that the former administration used the FACE Act to go after allegedly peaceful pro-life protesters. I should note that this report has been variously described across multiple outlets as cherry picked, shoddy, misleading, hypocritical, inaccurate, incomplete, a distortion of the truth that disregards multiple court rulings and jury verdicts. There is no credible evidence that prior administrations selectively enforced the FACE Act against anti-abortion protesters, it’s simply a reflection of the facts.”
Witnesses reinforced that the law’s constitutionality is well-established. Jessica Waters, an attorney and the senior scholar in residence at American University, testified, “We have heard other witnesses opine today that FACE should be repealed and that it is somehow unconstitutional. But let us be clear, that is simply not what the law says. Every federal court to consider such arguments has unequivocally held that FACE was a constitutional exercise of Congress’s authority.”
Democratic lawmakers also pointed to the real-world consequences of clinic blockades. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.-09) described a recent blockade in Memphis:
“In December, seventeen people were arrested for blocking access to the Planned Parenthood clinic in Memphis. These protesters weren’t stopping abortions. Abortion in Tennessee is a felony at all stages of pregnancy, with no exceptions for rape or incest. The people entering that clinic were seeking routine, preventive services like blood pressure checks, breast cancer screenings, and STI treatment. This wasn’t about protecting life—it was about intimidation and imposing one group’s beliefs on everyone else.”
The hearing was not an isolated oversight exercise, but part of a broader, coordinated push by antiabortion lawmakers to dismantle FACE and weaken federal protections for patients and providers. Democrats and expert witnesses made clear that the law is both firmly constitutional and critically necessary amid ongoing threats and violence.
As Waters emphasized in her testimony, “People should be able to seek medical care, and medical professionals should be able to provide it, without fear of violence or intimidation. This is an issue that warrants a federal remedy.”