Lawyers for a pro-life advocate say they will ask a federal court to block a new San Diego ordinance that restricts speech outside abortion facilities.

The longtime activist, Roger Lopez, is a retired grandfather who has been counseling outside of local abortion clinics for 15 years.

Lopez’s attorney, Paul Jonna, told The Epoch Times on Sept. 18 that he will move for an injunction “very soon” to halt the local law, which he argues is unconstitutional. Jonna is special counsel at the Thomas More Society, a nonprofit public interest law firm, and a partner at LiMandri & Jonna in Rancho Santa Fe, California.

Jonna called the ordinance an “egregious constitutional overreach” and said, “It’s very susceptible to being struck down, and we’re quite confident that it will be.”

The ordinance, which took effect in June, limits speech within 100 feet of the entrance of a health care facility, school, or church and imposes additional restrictions within an eight-foot “bubble zone” around people within that zone.

In addition, the ordinance allows victims to sue for damages of $2,500 for each violation. A first conviction under the law can also lead to three months of imprisonment and a $500 fine.

Lopez argues in his legal complaint, filed on Sept. 5 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, that the ordinance runs afoul of his 14th Amendment rights by infringing on his ability to offer information on alternatives to abortion and that it violates the First Amendment right of women entering a clinic to receive it.

A previous city ordinance placed the onus on the individuals approached near the protected location to say they did not want to engage with a demonstrator. But the new ordinance puts the burden on the demonstrator to seek permission to come within eight feet of someone who is within 100 feet of the protected location.

The complaint states that bubble zones themselves are unconstitutional, according to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Schenk v Pro-Choice Network (1997), because they interfere with protesters’ ability to advocate their position by making protesters constantly relocate to maintain an allowable distance instead of focusing on their message.

The San Diego city attorney’s office previously held the view that bubble zones were unconstitutional, and it “has never disavowed its conclusion that bubble zones are unconstitutional,” the complaint adds.

Jonna said the new ordinance also has a noise component.

The conversation between a demonstrator and a woman outside a clinic cannot exceed 55 decibels, “which is about the same level as a home refrigerator,” he said. Street noise is typically well above that level, he added.

According to the legal complaint, the ordinance prohibits a demonstrator from making “any disturbing, excessive, or offensive noise which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitivities.”

It also forbids “any noise which unreasonably interferes with the workings of” a protected facility.

The Epoch Times reached out to the City of San Diego for comment on the lawsuit but did not receive a reply by the time of publication.

San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said in June, “For nearly three decades, the city’s laws on this issue have [remained] unchanged, and yet we know that our social and our political landscape has evolved, particularly in recent years, and the need to protect the public from undue harassment and intimidation while still preserving their first amendment rights has become even more pressing.”