California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a statement after the conclusion of evidence in his lawsuit against Heartbeat International, a national anti-abortion group, and RealOptions Obria, a chain of five crisis pregnancy centers in Northern California, over their promotion of abortion pill reversal, with the parties presenting evidence over six weeks of trial proceedings in Alameda County Superior Court.
Bonta said, “Every Californian deserves truthful, accurate information when making deeply personal healthcare decisions.”
“Our lawsuit alleges that Heartbeat International and RealOptions promoted APR despite knowing that there is no scientific evidence that shows it is effective or safe,” Bonta stated.
He added, “After several weeks of testimony, we remain confident in the strength of our case and look forward to the court’s decision.”
The lawsuit, filed in September 2023, alleges that Heartbeat International and RealOptions use fraudulent and misleading claims to advertise abortion pill reversal (APR), an unproven and largely experimental procedure, in violation of California’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law.
California is seeking $19.86 million against Heartbeat International and $640,000 against RealOptions, and is also seeking a permanent injunction that would bar the groups from speaking about the protocol.
The case marks a significant moment in the nation’s abortion landscape.
A first-of-its-kind trial opened June 24 in Oakland that could decide whether California can fine two pro-life nonprofits more than $20 million for telling women about a treatment that may reverse a chemical abortion.
In September 2023, Bonta sued Heartbeat International, a national network operating the Abortion Pill Rescue Network, and RealOptions Obria, a chain of five California crisis pregnancy centers, in Alameda County Superior Court.
Bonta said in a statement that Heartbeat International and RealOptions “took advantage of pregnant patients at a deeply vulnerable time in their lives, using false and misleading claims to lure them in and mislead them about a potentially risky procedure.”
“We are launching today’s lawsuit to put a stop to their predatory and unlawful behavior,” Bonta added.
The defense mounted a different argument about the case’s nature.
Peter Breen, executive vice president and head of litigation at Thomas More Society, called the case “the pro-life ‘trial of the century'” and said Bonta’s “gag order” was unprecedented, while the $20 million in fines was “ruinous.”
Breen said, “Heartbeat provides free, lifesaving information to women who have changed their minds about chemical abortion and want a second chance at life for their babies.”
“If Bonta succeeds, those moms go unaided and their babies likely die,” Breen continued.
“The First Amendment forbids government from suppressing speech it doesn’t like, especially on deeply contested scientific debates,” he said.
The Thomas More Society is representing both Heartbeat International and RealOptions in the case.
Heartbeat and RealOptions argue that women should be allowed to have access to information about APR, an updated treatment used since the 1950s to prevent miscarriage, and say that the state’s case is an unprecedented use of consumer protection law to curb the free flow of medical information.
The protocol administers supplemental progesterone to counteract mifepristone—the first drug in the two-pill abortion regimen—allowing the pregnancy to continue, with peer-reviewed studies showing a 64–68% success rate, and APR is safe, legal, and has helped thousands of women bring their babies into the world.
In the viral moment that frames this ongoing legal fight, both sides clashed over what information pregnant women should receive after taking the first abortion pill.
Bonta asked the court to impose a penalty of more than $20 million against Heartbeat International and $600,000 against RealOptions, which would amount to a financial death sentence for the nonprofits.
Heartbeat International learned of the lawsuit through interview requests and noted that women who regret their chemical abortion choice deserve the right to try and save their pregnancies.
Heartbeat International said it had not been served with the lawsuit as of the initial announcement, having learned about it through interview requests.
The organizations argue the state is targeting them for the message they share.
Heartbeat is asking the court to find that the First Amendment protects its speech and women’s rights to access information about all available options following a chemical abortion.
Bonta brought a false advertising lawsuit against Heartbeat International despite receiving no actual complaints from California women, and even after three years of litigation, Bonta has yet to produce a single client who claims she was misled by Heartbeat International or RealOptions.
The case carries implications far beyond California’s borders.
California AG Rob Bonta wants to extract a cool $20 million dollars, effectively hoping to bankrupt Heartbeat.
Judge’s ruling on the case is now pending.