Attorney general slams Beverly Hills for ‘illegally interfering’ with abortion clinic
Beverly Hills officials delayed permit approvals and pressured the landlord to prevent an abortion clinic from opening in the city last year, violating state constitutional protections for reproductive rights, according to an investigation by the California Department of Justice.
The city must now conduct comprehensive training for its employees about state and federal protections for abortion clinics and develop a procedure for reporting potential future violations to the state under a stipulated judgment announced Thursday by Attorney General Rob Bonta. It is the first complaint the state has brought under Proposition 1, a measure approved by voters in 2022 that added “reproductive freedom” to the California constitution.
Bonta, who is weighing a run for governor in 2026, touted the settlement as a warning to other local governments that may consider similar actions “illegally interfering” with abortion access. He would not confirm whether his office has opened additional investigations.
“Unfortunately, it’s a reminder that anti-reproductive freedom actions don’t just happen in Texas or red states that are cracking down on reproductive health care, but it can happen right here in California, even though we have some of the strongest reproductive health laws in the nation,” Bonta said in an interview with CalMatters.
“These are important rights that need to be protected,” he added. “We will get involved, we’ll investigate, we will sue and we will prevail if any other cities or jurisdictions seek to follow Beverly Hills’ poor example here.”
But Beverly Hills, which faces ongoing litigation from the clinic operator, continues to deny any wrongdoing. The city released a statement ahead of Bonta’s announcement disputing the allegations and noting that the settlement included no fines or penalties and could not be used in court.
“The City reaffirms and pledges that it did not and will not discriminate against any reproductive healthcare provider and strongly supports a woman’s right to choose,” Mayor Lester Friedman said.
One member of the city council, John Mirisch, said he voted against the stipulated judgment and accused Bonta of singling out Beverly Hills, a Jewish-majority city, while ignoring a rise in anti-Semitic incidents on college campuses over the past year.
“I cannot support political theater from the Attorney General’s office, aimed at scoring cheap political points by grandstanding using the Beverly Hills name, while at the same time other important issues are left by the wayside,” Mirisch said in a statement.
Bonta called the response “a lot of spin after the fact” and “gaslighting.” He said Beverly Hills would not have signed onto the settlement if it had done nothing wrong and the terms reflect what is possible under Proposition 1, which does not authorize monetary damages.
“They went out of their way to undermine the rights of DuPont and the patients it could have and would have served,” he said. “It was deliberate and intentional and reprehensible.”
The situation in Beverly Hills caught the attention of activists and state officials because it exposed the limits of California’s positioning as a haven for abortion rights, CalMatters reported earlier this year. Though the state has strengthened its protections since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a constitutional right to abortion in 2022.
Conservative politicians have blocked at least two other proposed abortion clinics from opening in their communities over the past two years, while many California counties have no clinics at all. Because abortion is prohibited in the state once a fetus can live outside the womb — around 24 weeks of pregnancy — except when the life or health of the mother is threatened, most providers will not treat women who need abortions late in their pregnancy, forcing them to leave California for care.
DuPont Clinic, a Washington, D.C., provider that performs abortions into the third trimester, had sought to add an office in Beverly Hills to fill that gap. But before it even opened, the clinic became a target of anti-abortion protesters — who projected the words “MURDER MILL” onto the side of the building during a demonstration and spoke out at a city council meeting in April 2023 — raising fears among city officials about security and disruptions.
Email records show that Beverly Hills, which has publicly professed support for abortion rights, subsequently placed a hold on approved permits for the project while staff reviewed whether the abortion clinic was an allowed use for the property. At the same time, city officials, including from the police department, met with opponents and Douglas Emmett, Inc., the company that owned the building, to discuss safety concerns.
The Justice Department concluded that the city “unlawfully interfered with DuPont’s opening by improperly delaying the issuance of approved building permits and actively engaged in a pressure campaign against the property owner” until it terminated the lease in June 2023.
This included suggesting without any evidence that the clinic “would cause security threats against the building’s other tenants, going so far as to say that the building would be subject to violent protests, bomb threats, and ‘lone-wolf’ active shooters,” according to a summary of the findings, and then claiming that the city would be “so overwhelmed by this fictitious threat that they’d be unable to provide resources to the landlord and building — threatening to abandon their sworn responsibility to uphold public safety.”
When Douglas Emmett rescinded its lease, DuPont Clinic sued both the landlord and Beverly Hills, alleging that they “colluded and conspired with the protestors to try to drive DuPont out of the City.” Though they denied the characterization, local abortion rights activists launched a campaign to hold Beverly Hills accountable for what they believe was a betrayal of the city’s public commitment to reproductive freedom in order to avoid more disturbances from anti-abortion groups.
It’s unclear whether what impact the Justice Department agreement might have on DuPont’s case or its effort to open a clinic in California. A lawyer for the company said it was reviewing the filing.
“Anti-abortion extremism has no place in the state of California,” Dr. Jennefer Russo, DuPont’s chief medical officer, said in a statement. “DuPont will continue to fight for abortion access for Californians and those who need to travel here for care they cannot access in their own states.”
Earlier this year, the Legislature approved and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new law to create a streamlined approval process for reproductive health clinics that meet certain development criteria. The measure — which could make it easier for clinics to open even in communities that largely oppose abortion — was part of a wave of legislation to tamp down on a surging rebellion in more conservative parts of California against the state’s liberal governance.
___
This story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.