WLP attorney Susan J. Frietsche was in Commonwealth Court on Monday June 3, 2019 where she argued on behalf of Pennsylvania abortion providers in one of four active lawsuits we are currently involved in to help protect doctors, staff, and patients amid a stark rise in extremist anti-abortion harassment.
The case is called Crocco v. Pennsylvania Department of Health.
Case Background
Jean Crocco is an anti-abortion activist and employee of the Pro-Life Action League, an extremist anti-abortion organization based in Chicago. The Pro-Life Action League has a lengthy history of threatening and harming abortion providers.
Crocco filed a Right-to-Know request with the Pennsylvania Department of Health seeking production of “the most recent applications/reapplications for registration and licensing (if applicable) for all the non-hospital abortion facilities in PA.”
In response to Crocco’s Right to Know request, the Department of Health produced the medical facilities’ licensure records with personal email and postal addresses redacted, as allowed under the law. The Department further redacted or withheld names and medical license numbers of medical providers and others affiliated with the facilities pursuant to the Right to Know Law’s personal safety and security exemption.
Crocco subsequently filed an appeal to the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records seeking all names and license numbers of physicians, administrators, medical directors, directors of nursing, owners, and trustees or board members affiliated with Pennsylvania’s registered and/or licensed non-hospital abortion facilities.
WLP Senior Staff Attorney Susan J. Frietsche and crew outside the court building after giving oral arguments in support of Pennsylvania-based abortion providers in Crocco v. Pennsylvania Department of Health.
WLP’s Role Representing PA Abortion Providers
While the legal dispute is between a state agency and a Chicago-based activist organization, Pennsylvania abortion providers are third parties with direct interest in the case.
In January 2019, the Women’s Law Project entered the case as “intervenors” representing the interests of 9 non-hospital Pennsylvania-based abortion providers whose information and safety are at stake in this case.
Represented by attorneys at the Women’s Law Project, the non-hospital abortion providers submitted briefs, declarations, and documentary evidence of the threats and harms they have been forced to face from extremist anti-abortion activists.
It’s important to note that death threats and harassment of physicians and staff working at healthcare facilities that provide abortion care have escalated in the last two years alongside legislative assaults on equitable abortion access.
Office of Open Records Upholds DOH’s Decision
On July 13, 2018, the OOR appeals officer upheld the redaction of the medical providers’ names and medical license numbers based on the Right-to-Know law’s personal safety and security exemption, finding that the evidence showed specific instances of harassment and violence against these very providers.
Crocco then filed a motion for reconsideration, which was subsequently denied by OOR.
In response, Crocco, represented by attorney Thomas Olp of the Thomas More Society, appealed to the courts. The Thomas More Society is a Chicago-based law firm that frequently represents anti-abortion activists, including Operation Rescue, in litigation.
WLP in Commonwealth Court
In our brief and in court this week, the Women’s Law Project argued that the Office of Open Records correctly determined that the names and license numbers of medical providers and others closely affiliated with abortion facilities are exempt from disclosure under the personal safety and security exemption of the Right to Know law.
A weighty, unrebutted evidentiary record supports this determination: Every medical facility whose records are at issue in this case produced compelling proof that requiring the Department of Health to disclose personal information about abortion providers and their close associates is highly likely to subject the providers to harassment, abuse, and physical danger.
At the June 3, 2019 hearing Olp, the attorney representing Crocco and the Pro-Life Action League, dismissed the long record of harms to medical professionals who provide abortion care as “anecdotal” and “statistical” and characterized Crocco as “a nice little old lady,” disregarding the fact that her out-of-state information request was filed on behalf of a radical extremist organization.
Crocco, argued Olp, wants information about Pennsylvania-based providers so she can “do good things with it.”
WLP attorney Susan J. Frietsche and an attorney representing the Department of Health argued in support of the OOR’s determination.
Stay tuned as we await a ruling from the three-judge panel, composed of Commonwealth Court President Judge Hannah Leavitt and Judges Simpson and Ceisler.
The Women’s Law Project is a public interest law center devoted to defending and expanding the rights of women, girls, and LGBTQ people in Pennsylvania and beyond.
Sign up for WLP’s Action Alerts. Stay up to date on issues and policy by following us on twitter and liking us on Facebook.
We are a non-profit organization. Please consider supporting equal rights for women and girls by making a one-time donation or scheduling a monthly contribution.
