Supreme Court justices on Wednesday aggressively questioned whether a Massachusetts law that creates buffer zones around abortion clinics unconstitutionally inhibits the free-speech rights of antiabortion activists.
Several justices made clear in their questioning that they felt the law’s restrictions on who can enter a 35-foot space around a facility’s entrance unfairly targets those who want to hand out leaflets or speak to the women planning abortions.
Mark L. Rienzi, a Catholic University law professor representing Eleanor McCullen and others who say they want to support women who change their minds about ending their pregnancies, said the First Amendment doesn’t allow governments to “put people in prison for peaceful conversations.”
Massachusetts contends that a history of violence and intimidation at abortion clinics in the state convinced the legislature in 2007 to expand the protest-free zone around clinics.
Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Grace Miller told the justices that law enforcement officials told lawmakers that the old restrictions were not enough to provide free access to the clinics.
The state is supported by the Obama administration, and Deputy Solicitor General Ian H. Gershengorn said the restrictions were no different from protest-free zones that have been set up around funerals, circuses and political conventions.
But some justices said they saw a difference between protesters and activists such as McCullen, who says her interactions with women — offering to buy baby supplies and provide support for women who choose not to have an abortion — depend on the ability for “quiet conversations.”
Arrgghhhh! Get serious. I expect if McCullen set up shop (I expect any church would lend her some space) word would get around that she was willing to help pregnant women. She doesn’t need to invade someone else’s space.
I have done clinic escort and clinic defense. It’s dangerous and it’s hostile. I can’t do many of the things I used to enjoy doing because of injuries sustained from assaults by anti-abortion zealots. I have been pushed to the ground and stomped on. I have a bad knee and even worse wrists. I know exactly where it happened.
I would have rather had it happen to me, even living with chronic pain, than to have some young woman have to listen to strangers make empty promises and berate them. Many women I know have said that getting through the gauntlet of protestors was the worst part of their abortion.
How dare someone approach a woman they do not know, assume she is pregnant, and start a verbal assault? How dare some zealot decide they know what is best for a stranger. No, zealots do not have the right to accost patients going to a medical facility. Patients have rights also.
Shame on Justice Scalia.
“I object to you calling these people protesters,” Scalia told Miller, saying it was a case about counseling and “comforting” women, not protesting abortion.
Scalia is full of crap. “Comforting” women? Comforting my ass! Furthermore, McCullen and others do not have the right to counsel strangers, without their permission. Scalia lives in another world.
Set up a table in a neutral zone. Those who are interested will approach. Shame on Justice Kagan for questioning the distance of 35 feet. Maybe we can have her parade into a clinic and put up with the things that are said to presumably pregnant women and girls. Let her live a little on the wild side. Let her be an escort and have some crazed man assault her.
I have been there. I KNOW what it’s like. Is everyone violent? No. Are some people violent? Yes. How do you tell? You don’t. Therefore you have a buffer zone.
It’s no secret that I’m pro-life, but I have a problem with any kind of protest or whatever you want to call this that is aimed at private citizens who are going about their business. Protest politicians, businesses, government agencies, whatever. But private citizens should be left alone when they’re going about their (legal) business.
I feel the same way about people who stand outside polling places trying to hand me “sample” ballots. I don’t want their gratuitous “good morning!” which is for the express purpose of thrusting some partisan crap into my hands. I hate being marketed to and preached at.
No disagreement here at all. I don’t care if people stand there with candidate information. If I want it, I will come up and get it. Meanwhile, don’t approach me.
I think it is wrong to approach anyone going for medical treatment, regardless of what it is.
I don’t understand why this is even an issue for the courts. It seems so easy to fix. If you run an abortion business, make sure that your entrance is at least 35 feet from the property line (like on an upper floor of an office building) Then there is no first amendment issue at all. Protesters can protest all they want on public property but if the property line is far enough away from the entrance, people can come and go without interference. If protesters are coming onto private property to protest, then it’s a trespassing issue and they can be made to leave or arrested if they won’t leave.
The government should only restrict people’s free speech on public land for very good reasons and only when there isn’t another option available. I don’t see why we need a law that restricts protests on public land when there is such an easy solution. (I’m not a fan of the “free speech zones” that get created at the political conventions either. All public land is supposed to be a free speech zone with very, very limited exceptions.)
They still harass patients coming from their cars. Then there is the sneaking in the buildings to get at patients.
Locally, many years ago, a fake clinic was set up right next door so that the fake clinic’s door could almost block the real clinic’s entrance.
Not sure what exists now but it isn’t my problem.
The audacity of these people to presume that a woman has not already thought long and hard about this difficult choice is so offensive. Scalia clearly has NEVER had any in-depth interaction with a woman who has had to suffer through the intrusive gauntlet.
I find it very doubtful that these same people had the same patience towards all those Occupy Wall Street protestors.
what is the difference between a protestor and an activist? There are plenty of protestors that are quiet. I get the feeling that Scalia would really like to see some of this activity become confrontational.
What’s next? Protests over birth control being available at Walgreen’s? Will every man have to pass a squadron of screaming busybodies to reach the counter to buy his Trojans? Very doubtful. The harassment is aimed at women.
Too funny! Many older men will whine and pretend that having to ask the druggist for condoms is similar.
I think it is very wrong that protesters assume that every woman walking into an “abortion clinic” is there to get an abortion. Many of the clinics also offer pap smears, birth control education, free pelvic exams etc. Not every woman who walks through the clinic doors is there for an abortion. Some may be there to determine if their miscarriage was complete. Some may be there for birth control education. Some may be there for a simple pregnancy verification. Some may be there for a pap smear or have an issue with their reproductive process. And some insurance carrying people like myself might show up to have a pap smear done because I don’t feel like waiting for the 4 weeks it will take my regular gyn office to see me when I feel like there is an issue with perimenopause that I want dealt with sooner rather than later. AND if I go to an “abortion clinic” for routine gyn care, my insurance does cover the costs.
Great points! Some people are also there with a friend. Those people get hassled too.
I just see it all as such a violation of privacy.
great points!
@DB
Especially Planned Parenthood which is not all about about abortion. Planned Parenthood is all about prevention, This lady was specifically targeting Planned Parenthood.
Watching the video, it’s very obviously what this woman is all about. I would say she might just want to play Sunday school teacher. Scalia conveniently ignored that rather large component of this argument.
I wonder if an anti war contingency were protesting if there would be a buffer zone between the protesters and the troops? I would hope so.
The ass-hats in the General assembly are hard at work, according to Virginia NARAL:
Having a hard time understanding why people who oppose abortion are also trying to eliminate birth control. Screw them. I have no more patience.
Maybe Wolverine ought to take a look at Roe vs. Wade and then tell me about people following the law.
Roe v. Wade. The law can be changed, and many people want to change it — even the woman who was the principal in the orginal case. Advocating and demonstrating for that is the American way. I notice that one of the women planning to march in the pro-life parade tomorrow had two abortions as a young woman and was at one point a month away from becoming a member of the Virginia Planned Parenthood Board. She had an epiphany and says she is marching tomorrow in memory of her two babies.
Wanting to get rid of birth control is an over-generalized false argument. Because some religions oppose the use of contraception and want to avoid violating their own faith by paying for it does not mean they are trying to prevent others from having access. And, if Planned Parenthood runs into problems with their abortion facilities, as in Texas, why can they not continue to offer the other vital services on their women’s health list, including contraception? After all, PP has always solemnly assured us that the tax dollars they receive are NOT going to abortion. And, under such circumstances, I doubt if private donors would object to a shifting of funds to critical remaining operations.
Roe v Wade is a court decision. It isn’t from legislation. Brown v Board of education could also be overturned. So could Griswald v Connecticut.
Norma McCorvy is a nut case. She also wasn’t the only one in the Roe decision. There was also Doe v Bolton. That was the case out of Georgia.
McCorvey has an illustrious past. She has been a high school drop out, drug abuser, carnival barker, lesbian, born again Christian, and now an anti choice “activist.” Its rather difficult to take someone seriously who has worn so many hats.
I am sure many people want to have Roe overturned. I hope they aren’t stupid enough to think that overturning Roe will end abortion. It will not.
Wanting to get rid of birth control is not a false argument. If you, as a business owner, refuse to pay for contraceptive coverage on health care plans, yea, you pretty much are deciding what others can do. No religion says you cannot pay for contraception. Some religions forbid their flock to use contraception. Big difference. Trying to say it is anything other than what it is, is simply false and hypocritical.
Wolverine, just out of curiosity, why is it ok for my tax dollars to go for a war I may not approve of and not ok for your tax dollars go into title X funds at Planned Parenthood. I am frankly tired of the fake demonizing of PP. If you were truly anti abortion, you would do what you cold to end unwanted pregnancy. Planned Parenthood seems to reach the most people in the city setting. The war on planned parenthood is an attempt at control. Nothing more, nothing less. Its part of being a big bad culture warrior. Culture warriors just can’t keep their noses out of other people’s business.
I say you are totally wrong on a threat to Planned Parenthood. If PP offered all of its currently advertised women’s health services except for abortion, I posit that they would have very little trouble at all with social conservatives. Certainly not with us. Saying that social conservatives want to control PP is nothing more, in my opinion, than an attempt to goad your side into greater defensive efforts– as in “The War on Women.” Not unusual in any conflict in contemporary America. All sides use it. And my nose is where my nose has always been for decades: trying to save the lives of the innocent. The defense of innocent life has always been my business.
I think you do not understand the Catholic and Evangelical stance on contraception and ACA. The Little Sisters of the Poor, for example, are not advocating that contraception should be forbidden to others. They are saying that forcing THEM to pay for your contraceptives either directly or through some sort of “clever” ACA scheme is a violation of their sacred vows of loyalty to their faith.
Funny thing about Ms. McCorvy. When she was on the pro-choice side, I never heard her called a nut by you all.
Perhaps you didn’t talk to the right people. I don’t need to name call to notice that she has a lead a life that is rather …let’s see..how do I put this…sketchy and undirected.
I heard her speak once. She was with Sarah Weddington. She is limited. That’s about all that needs to be said. She isn’t going to make up my mind about much of anything.
I understand what the REAL Catholic position is on contraception. I do not think that evangelicals have a set stance or religious dogma on contraception. The Little sisters are really pulling a stretch at the moment. I have no respect for falsely using church doctrine.
They don’t need to pay for anyone’s contraception but their employees. That’s pretty simple.
Perhaps if you want to save the lives of the innocent, you should start with preventing pregnancy in the first place. That is the line of first defense against abortion. It doesn’t happen if there is no pregnancy. Past that, it is none of your business or mine who decides to terminate a pregnancy. It will happen, regardless of law. It always has and it always will.
Pro choice people work to make abortion safe, legal and rare. You folks who oppose planned parenthood and other agencies that distribute Title X services just up the ante. If everyone worked to make unwanted pregnancy a thing of the past, abortion would greatly diminish. Unfortunately, too many social conservatives have to stick their noses in and start telling other people how to live their lives and complicate things so that access to safe, reliable contraception is often difficult. Unwanted, unplanned pregnancies cause abortion. Wanted, planned pregnancies almost never lead to abortion except in the case of fetal anomaly.
I was raised evangelical/fundamentalist. My old home denomination is right up there with the Catholics in the fight against the demands being made by ACA, particularly on abortifacients.
55 million innocent dead since Roe v. Wade — far too many of them “on demand” in an effort to have one’s own mistakes paid for by the life of another being. That lady who was once near to becoming a member of the Virginia Board of Planned Parenthood remarked that the two abortions she had to allow her to keep her career going in the media left a big hollow inside her, only now being filled by redemption.
The battle goes on.
Today marks the 41st anniversary of the Roe v Wade decision. What a tragedy. It is my hope that this evil scourge on our country ends soon.The good news is the pro-life movement is stronger, and younger than ever. The march in DC today, which will be ignored by the MSM, is a sign of great hope. In spite of the sad occasion, the joy in that crowd is always amazing to me. The theme is year is about adoption.
Rick, Thanks for sharing your opinion.
A few things to consider…there were probably a million abortions a year before the Roe v. Wade decision. Not all were back alley abortions but they were, none the less, not totally illegal.
There are many of us who do not feel abortion is an “evil scourge.” I hope that the pro-life community you speak of is working at great lengths to promote available, accessible contraception so that abortion simply is unneeded because there is no unwanted, unplanned pregnancy.
Do you actually know any pro choice people with whom you have discussed the issue? I doubt that you or I would change our minds but sometimes it is helpful to see someone else’s point of view. If you simply see me as a ‘baby killer’ then we haven’t made too much progress. If you understand why I am pro choice, then perhaps there is common ground out there we could discover. If you and I agreed, then think of the number of abortions that simply wouldn’t be necessary.
If we do not find common ground, then we will always be at each other’s throats and will be battling through the politicians. When you think about it, way too many politicians get into office simply by mouthing the right words about abortion. Abortion isn’t all that common place that we should be deciding our political leaders based on something so deeply personal.
While I don’t argue the pros and cons of abortion, I will be glad to share my views about why I feel as I do.
I wish the theme would be about avoiding unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. That is how you are really going to cut down on the number of abortions performed each year.
MH, I do not know how much common ground we have on the subject of abortion, but I am thinking not much. My post was just a reminder that the Pro-life movement is quite alive and vibrant, and YOUNG. This younger generation sees themselves as survivors of this holocaust of the unborn, and there is no doubt in their purpose – end abortion forever. Over a half million people were at the March for Life yesterday, in bitter cold –they aren’t there to party. They are not evil people; in fact it is a very polite crowd, as noted every year by the Park Service. You might find these young folks point of view refreshing.
Perhaps next year you can go down to DC and see for yourself.
We probably don’t have much common ground, I agree. I formed my core beliefs many years ago when I was a kid during the Thalidamide epidemic. It has not wavered. I am very much into quality of life issues and I also believe in more liberal end of life choices.
I don’t think that young people today are any more survivors of abortion than I am. Abortion didn’t just begin with Roe v. Wade. It has been around for eons. It has just gotten safer and less damaging to women. Someone needs to tell young people that abortion will always exist, legal or illegal. Middle and upper class women will always have access. The poor will not. Hopefully these young people will find it in their hearts to open their wallets more to those women and children.
Every time I see a protestor carrying a sign which does nothing other than advertise where the clinics are, I think of how much good it would do for those folks to volunteer child care services so a mother could have safe, affordable day care so she would work. Most abortion decisions are economic. A few books of diaper coupons really do nothing in the grand scheme of things. It costs several hundred thousand dollars to raise a child to age 18. I know. I have done it and it hasn’t been real fancy raising either.
I don’t think most pro life people are evil at all. In fact, I think most of us are pro-life. What would the opposite be? Pro-death? Anti-life? I think what we disagree on is who gets to make reproductive decisions for us. Do we make them for ourselves or do we let the government make them for us? I prefer to make my own. I am in the best position to know my own moral guidelines.
I am actually pretty aware of the anti choice point of view, both for contemporaries and from young people. I find the young people painfully naïve about many of life’s choices but its refreshing to hear people who aren’t horribly jaded.
Now I feel you are talking down to me from what you must perceive as the moral high road. I don’t think you know enough about me to do that. You might be surprised at some of my positions I have taken over the years. However, those were positions *I* made, not the government. Therein lies the difference.
The Park Service reported about 25,000 people in attendance down from a half million from the year before. Conditions yesterday really were not safe. Frost bite could occur in like 15 minutes on exposed skin.
I have been the the March for Life. I went as a pro choice person. It used to be run by Nellie Gray. She was a turn off because she also railed against contraception. This is simply cognitive dissonance.
Were you out there yesterday? I would have probably rescheduled it.
@RickBookwalter…Do the minions of pro-life do so because they can afford to do so? Do the “vibrant and young” having children capable of raising them within their own realm? No!!! The daddies and or mommies of the laboring daughters pay for car seats pay ,for the labor and delivery, and the clothes and medical costs. We lead our children thru the chaos of
wic appointments and the like. We babysit for free. We pay for the higher education for her “no matter what” costs. Refreshing? Maybe for you. Refreshing for her father and I…not so much.
That is if the insurance even covers delivery and labor for dependents!!! Maybe all that has changed.
You are right. Its fine to be all starry eyed…when you aren’t footing the bill.