Lena Health, a company offering alternative DNA collection kits for sexual assault survivors, has filed a lawsuit against New York Attorney General Letitia James and Pennsylvania Attorney General Michelle Henry. The lawsuit alleges that the attorneys general have violated the First Amendment by threatening to shut down Lena Health and penalize its CEO, Madison Campbell, for promoting their self-administered kits.
Lena Health argues that their Early Evidence Kit (EEK) provides victims with a time-sensitive option for collecting DNA evidence after an assault, empowering them to make informed choices. The company believes their approach empowers survivors by giving them control over their evidence collection process.
The lawsuit specifically points to letters sent by the attorneys general, which warned Lena Health to cease their activities within seven days or face legal action. These letters accused Lena Health of engaging in deceptive practices by promoting their kits as an alternative to traditional rape kits, claiming it could discourage survivors from seeking traditional services.
Alex Little, the attorney representing Lena Health, stated that the lawsuit focuses on the attorneys general’s attempts to suppress Lena Health’s messaging about alternative options for sexual assault survivors. Little believes victims deserve a broader range of information and options, and that Lena Health plays a crucial role in providing that.
The attorneys general argue that Lena Health’s advertising is misleading and could deter survivors from seeking traditional forensic examinations. They maintain that their actions are necessary to protect survivors and ensure they receive appropriate care and support.
The lawsuit, filed on Monday, claims that the attorneys general’s actions constitute coercion and intimidation, interfering with Lena Health’s First Amendment rights to express its message. It challenges the notion that providing information about alternative options is inherently deceptive and argues that victims have the right to choose the course of action that best suits their needs.
Lena Health asserts that their kits are a valuable tool for empowering survivors and providing them with a greater sense of control and agency in the aftermath of a sexual assault. The lawsuit seeks to protect their right to communicate this message freely, free from undue interference by government officials.
The lawsuit is expected to spark a debate about the role of government in regulating information related to sexual assault services and the extent to which companies can promote alternative options without facing legal repercussions. The outcome of the case will have significant implications for the freedom of speech and the ability of organizations to provide support to survivors in ways they deem appropriate.
The attorneys general have yet to issue a formal response to the lawsuit. However, Letitia James’ office has previously defended its actions, stating that Lena Health’s kits are misleading and could potentially harm survivors. The case will likely be closely watched by advocates for sexual assault victims, First Amendment experts, and companies seeking to provide alternative services in sensitive areas.
