Equal Application of the Law Questioned as Elderly Women Face Prison

The Biden Administration appears to be rounding up hardened criminals, one elderly pro-life protester at a time. A federal jury convicted 73-year-old Jean Marshall and 74-year-old Joan Bell of felony conspiracy by blocking access to an abortion provider. Citing the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, government prosecutors vigorously pursued jail time for the old gals and released this statement:

“The defendants face up to a maximum of 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $350,000. US District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who presided over the trial, ordered the defendants immediately detained as required by statute. Sentencing will be scheduled at a later date.”

The FACE Act, which “prohibits threats of force, obstruction and property damage intended to interfere with reproductive health care services,” has provided the justification for pursuing those who believe abortion is the act of taking a life. Since Roe v. Wade was overturned, the government has begun legal actions against pro-life activists using the FACE Act as its rationale.  Many who are vehemently against abortion feel the measure is an assault on their freedom of speech. Moreover, many on the right feel the law is being applied in an unequal manner with a more lenient attitude toward the violence inflicted upon pro-life advocates.

Marshall and Bell were part of an organized group that entered an abortion clinic without permission and barred access to exam rooms using furniture, chains, ropes, and their bodies. They violated the FACE Act, clearly. But are such prosecutions actively pursued against those who are pro-abortion?

Are Priorities in Order?

In May of 2023, two elderly gents were beaten severely as they prayed in front of a Planned Parenthood branch in Baltimore. Although there were several eyewitnesses, the culprit has not been found.

In Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton has requested the DOJ investigate the increasing violence against pro-life organizations and public protesters. In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, he writes, “Charities that support pregnant mothers in need have been firebombed, and pro-life organizations have been attacked almost daily and terrorized. One report, from June 13, documented attacks involving arson, vandalism, or both against at least 13 pro-life centers across the country.”

Paxton also cited the far-left pro-abortion organization Jane’s Revenge, which laid claim to brutal attacks in Colorado, Massachusetts, Oregon, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. Posting on several social media platforms, the group openly states, “We are in your city. We are in every city. Medical imperialism will not face a passive enemy.” It calls on its followers “to paint, to burn, to cut, to jam through attacking,” and “find joy, courage, and strip the veneer of impenetrability held by these violent institutions.” And yet, they have not been listed as domestic terrorists. The leftwing media and the Biden administration have not condemned what could fairly be described as incitement of political violence and terrorism.

Protesting is a major tenet of being an American. Pro-life and pro-abortion factions should each be allowed to protest without fear of retribution. If they cross the line and commit a felony, they should pay the penalty. That condition should apply to all involved in the civil unrest, no matter who sits in the Oval Office. But the facts seem to tell a different tale.