Pro-Life Groups Ask DC Circuit to Uphold Free Speech Right to Chalk Pro-Life Message on Sidewalk
Attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom filed an opening brief this week with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on behalf of members of the Frederick Douglass Foundation and Students for Life of America, asking the court to revive a First Amendment lawsuit against the District of Columbia.
The case traces back to August 2020, when D.C. police officers stopped members of the two pro-life groups from writing "Black Pre-Born Lives Matter" in washable chalk on a public sidewalk outside a Planned Parenthood facility and arrested two of the demonstrators for defacing public property. That same summer, other protesters spray-painted permanent messages on city streets and monuments, including "Black Lives Matter" and "I can't breathe," without facing arrest, according to ADF.
This is not the first time the case has reached the D.C. Circuit. Three years ago, the appeals court reinstated the pro-life groups' First Amendment claims and returned the case to the district court for further proceedings. After discovery, however, the district court again sided with the city, granting its motion for summary judgment. ADF attorneys are now asking the appeals court to reverse that ruling and send the case to a jury.
"Washington officials can't censor messages they disagree with," said ADF Senior Counsel John Bursch, vice president of appellate advocacy, arguing the First Amendment bars government from favoring some speakers over others.
Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins said blocking pro-life students from chalking their message "is viewpoint discrimination," while Frederick Douglass Foundation Chairman Troy Rolling said equal justice requires the law to apply the same to every viewpoint, favored or not.
The lawsuit is part of a broader pattern of legal battles over how cities and states have policed pro-life expression differently from other forms of protest since 2020. Pro-life advocates have pointed to the case as an example of viewpoint discrimination by local officials.
Final Thoughts
Free speech protections exist precisely for views that provoke disagreement, and this case underscores why pro-life advocates continue to press the courts to apply the First Amendment evenly, regardless of the message being written on a sidewalk.
Sources: Alliance Defending Freedom press release, July 16, 2026; Pregnancy Help News.
Related resources: Priests for Life on defending pro-life speech
