The Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada has initiated litigation against the City of London, Ontario, challenging the constitutionality and legality of a city bylaw that is designed to restrict pro-life speech.

The name of the bylaw is misleading. Called the “By-law to regulate the Delivery of Graphic Images in the City of London,” it defines “graphic image” only as an image of a fetus. This encompasses any image of a fetus, which would include, for example, an ultrasound photo of a healthy baby in the womb. The bylaw does not apply to any other kind of images, graphic or otherwise. The bylaw was passed in May 2022, the first of its kind in Canada.

The bylaw was introduced in response to a petition by Pro-Choice London, an advocacy group. The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada also wrote to City Council in support of a bylaw. The Director of Pro-Choice London, Deanna Ronson, is also a board member of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada. City Council briefly considered a bylaw that would have defined “graphic image” more objectively as “a detailed pictorial image or series of images, containing potentially sensitive content that may cause or trigger a negative reaction to the health and wellbeing of any person at any scale,” but soon abandoned this definition in favour of one that exclusively targeted fetal imagery.

“ARPA Canada is a Christian, pro-life organization that uses ultrasound photos of pre-born children in its campaign materials when advocating for modest pro-life laws that most Canadians would support, such as restrictions on sex-selective abortion,” says Anna Nienhuis of ARPA Canada. “This bylaw threatens ARPA and its volunteers with significant financial penalties simply for sharing the pro-life message with an ultrasound photo.”

The bylaw forbids delivering a flyer with any image of a fetus to a private residence unless the flyer is placed in a sealed envelope with the warning that it “contains a Graphic Image that may be offensive or disturbing to some people.”

“The bylaw requires ARPA and its volunteers to mislead people about our message,” says John Sikkema, ARPA’s legal counsel.

“Ultrasound photos are a beautiful view of life in the womb, something I’ve hung on my fridge and shared with friends and family. They are not offensive or disturbing – labelling them as graphic images is misleading and inappropriate,” said Nienhuis, a mother of five.

ARPA Canada argues in its application to the Divisional Court that such compelled expression is a well-recognized violation of the Charter right to freedom of expression. They also argue that a municipality does not have the constitutional authority to regulate the distribution of literature based on the City’s judgment of what specific content, point of view, or subject matter is objectionable or offensive.

ARPA contends that the bylaw’s true nature and purpose is to suppress pro-life content. Last year, ARPA challenged the City of St. Catharines’ bylaw that was modelled after and nearly identical to the City of London’s bylaw. In response, St. Catharines repealed its bylaw in August 2024, rather than attempting to defend it in court.

ARPA is asking the Divisional Court in London to strike down the bylaw as unconstitutional, as a violation of the Charter rights to freedom of conscience and religion and freedom of expression, and as outside of the authority of a municipal government.

-30- 

For media inquiries, please contact:

John Sikkema
ARPA Canada
Email: [email protected]
Tel. 1-866-691-2772