Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/26/supreme-court-abortion-clinic-buffer-zones/6698787/" rel="nofollow">http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/26/supreme-court-abortion-clinic-buffer-zones/6698787/


    WASHINGTON -- Abortion remains an issue that divides the Supreme Court, but the justices had less disagreement Thursday in defending the free speech rights of abortion opponents.


    The court ruled unanimously that Massachusetts went too far -- literally -- when it created 35-foot buffer zones around abortion clinics to keep demonstrators away from patients.


    The decision united Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's four liberals, who said the distance improperly removed demonstrators from public sidewalks and spaces. The other conservative justices would have issued a more sweeping verdict, striking down the ban on grounds that it targets abortion opponents' specific point of view.


    SUPREME COURT: Justices rule against Obama on recess appointments


    "Petitioners wish to converse with their fellow citizens about an important subject on the public streets and sidewalks -- sites that have hosted discussions about the issues of the day throughout history," Roberts wrote. While the state has an interest in public safety, it "pursued those interests by the extreme step of closing a substantial portion of a traditional public forum to all speakers."


    Although the court had upheld an eight-foot buffer zone in Colorado in 2000, the Massachusetts law passed in 2007 went 27 feet farther. During oral arguments in January, that had even the court's liberal, female justices wondering if the Bay State had gone too far. "That's a lot of space," Justice Elena Kagan said.


    The victory by 77-year-old Eleanor McCullen and her fellow demonstrators didn't tip the balance on the court over abortion as a medical procedure. Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision legalizing abortion, still stands. The justices this term refused to consider lower court decisions striking down Arizona's ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and Oklahoma's restrictions on abortion-inducing drugs and requirements for ultrasound tests.


    Nor did the ruling unite the justices on free speech rights. Earlier this year, they ruled that an anti-war protester could be kept away from a California military base and that political protesters could be moved by Secret Service agents away from former President George W. Bush.


    What remains to be seen is whether the new ruling could have national impact on the practice of erecting buffer zones and public protest zones. It could open others to question, such as those outside polling places, political conventions, funeral services -- even the court's own plaza.


    After a federal district judge ruled last year that a 1949 law barring demonstrations on court property was unconstitutional, the court quickly issued a regulation that has the same effect. Roberts — who did not speak at all during oral arguments in the abortion case — approved the regulation.


    The court's other four conservative justices agreed with the verdict but would have gone further by striking down the Massachusetts law as one that is based on demonstrators' viewpoint.


    "It is clear on the face of the Massachusetts law that it discriminates based on viewpoint," Justice Samuel Alito wrote. "Speech in favor of the clinic and its work by employees and agents is permitted; speech criticizing the clinic and its work is a crime. This is blatant viewpoint discrimination."


    McCullen and other abortion opponents have sought for years to waylay women on their way to getting abortions by offering advice and alternatives.


    "Today's ruling means I can offer loving help to a woman who wants it, and neither of us will go to jail for the discussion," McCullen said in a statement released by her attorneys. "I am delighted and thankful to God that the court has protected my right to engage in kind, hopeful discussions with women who feel they have nowhere else to turn."


    The Massachusetts buffer zone was enacted because of past violence, disruption and congestion at some of the state's 11 reproductive health clinics. In 1994, two clinic employees were shot and killed.


    The law is "justified solely by legitimate government interests in public safety and health care access," the state argued.


    But Mark Rienzi of Alliance Defending Freedom, McCullen's attorney, noted that most of the trouble occurred at the Boston clinic on Saturday mornings, a situation he said local police could manage.


    "The government cannot reserve its public sidewalks for Planned Parenthood, as if their message is the only one women should be allowed to hear," Rienzi said Thursday.


     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    Well it's not the first time Mass Legislature has gone too far.

    Although, I had no problem with this particular law.  Free speech doesn't mean close proximity to badger at clinics nor servicemen's funerals.

     

    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    35 Feet? Could swear I've seen protesters closer in Mass.

     

    Still, people who can't read a sign at 35 feet need new glasses. It sounds a bit far, but certainly not so far it blocks written or oral speech from being conveyed or heard.

     

     

     

     

     

    You have a right to be the crazy dude who used to (or still does?) stand outside the Park St. stop on the green line, covered in notes, and preach about Jesus. You do not have a right to accost people in the street, block their entrance to a building, and generally get in their faces.

     

    These laws were about the latter. Protesters weren't interested in standing around and having conversations with women going into abortion clinics. They were there to block them, and failing that, to intimidate and harass them into not entering. That doesn't fall under free speech.

     

    So sure, you have a right to try to have a conversation...but you don't have a right to coerce.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I have no doubt the MA legislature will quickly pass another law with a slightly shorter radius.



    "They were there to block them,and failing that, to intimidate and harass them into not entering".

    Physically blocking, harassing and intimidating is illegal, and wasnt what the case was about.

    You are just demonizing those whom you disagree with, as usual.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:
    [/QUOTE]

    You are just demonizing those whom you disagree with, as usual.

    [/QUOTE]

    You mean like the way people do to those who visit an abortion clinic???

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    Will this affect other 'buffer zones' such as the areas that cities cordon off when a political convention is in town?

    Wasn't that a point of contention in '04 in Boston where the authorities were allowed to herd people into chian-link pens far removed from the convention sites.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    You are just demonizing those whom you disagree with, as usual.



    You mean like the way people do to those who visit an abortion clinic???



Is that what you think the abortion protesters are doing?

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    Will this affect other 'buffer zones' such as the areas that cities cordon off when a political convention is in town?

    Wasn't that a point of contention in '04 in Boston where the authorities were allowed to herd people into chian-link pens far removed from the convention sites.




    Conceivably, but I doubt it. The reason is that as free speech is not absolute, it must yield to other concerns, and the most commonly cited concerns are security concerns. Politicians are targets, and so I suspect the Court would allow a significantly wider radius and other security measures to make sure there aren't assassins in with protestors, or whatever.

    I haven't read the decision, but I'm willing to bet they said something like "we upheld, X and Y distance because that's reasonable to prevent violence, but 35 is farther than enough."

    I don't agree with the decision really, but I'm also not particularly troubled by it. The concept of barrier zones is safe. 35 feet has simply been deemed too far.

     




    Considering that the anti-abortion extremists have bombed clinics and shot doctors would seem a pretty compelling argument for a safety bufferzone.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    You are just demonizing those whom you disagree with, as usual.



    You mean like the way people do to those who visit an abortion clinic???



    Is that what you think the abortion protesters are doing?



  • Well, I know they aren't there to escort people into the building with a bouquet of flowers. 

    Please, tell us what YOU think abortion protesters are doing when they stand outside clinics.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to high-road's comment:

    Considering that the anti-abortion extremists have bombed clinics and shot doctors would seem a pretty compelling argument for a safety bufferzone.




    The counter-argument wins, though: buffer zones don't stop those people. They aren't protesters. They'll just walk in and start shooting.

    It's not like you have to be a woman or escorted by one to enter. Who knows, you might be arriving to wait with a friend or significant other.

    It's rather like the assault weapon thing. I don't see any need for people to have AR-15s, but banning them isn't going to stop mass shootings.




    It'll be interesting to see the legislative response.

    Since other states have buffer zones that are still intact I wonder what distance would pass the SCotUS test.

    Thirty feet ... tewnty five ... twenty?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    I once lived a quarter-mile from a clinic, and though protestors were not constant, they were often present.

    There were a few minor incidents which necessitated a police presence, but they were mostly peaceful and respectful of neighbors.

    With that said, I wouldn't want to be forced to navigate such a close display in order to obtain health services which are none of anyone's business in the first place.

    And it's absolutely shameful what's been done against abortion providers and workers - threats and acts of violence, posting their addresses online, and so on.  These acts give horrible lie to non-threatening, respectful activists.

    I support the right of protest by speech NOT by violence or violent rhetoric.

     

    "When you're born, you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front-row seat."  - GC

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    Wait wait. I know. RRF's solution is that women seeking abortion should just open-carry on the way to the clinic.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    That would be a good test case for stand your ground.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    Wait wait. I know. RRF's solution is that women seeking abortion should just open-carry on the way to the clinic.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    That would be a good test case for stand your ground.




    Ummmm ....there is no crazy 'stand your ground' law in MA.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:


    Well it's not the first time Mass Legislature has gone too far.


    Although, I had no problem with this particular law.  Free speech doesn't mean close proximity to badger at clinics nor servicemen's funerals.


     


    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891





    Agree completely. I don't think the law was unreasonable. 


    Consider this....so called "abortion clinics" are women's health clinics that..while they perform abortion services...also perform hundreds of other medical services and procedures.


    So every woman who goes into these health clinics is subject to harassment and questions from someone who is a virtual stranger to them? Not to mention that women going to health care clinics are disproportionately low income.


    I am sorry..but a person should be able to go into a healthcare facility without being subject to an audience with an agenda.


     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:


    And it's absolutely shameful what's been done against abortion providers and workers - threats and acts of violence, posting their addresses online, and so on.  These acts give horrible lie to non-threatening, respectful activists.


    I support the right of protest by speech NOT by violence or violent rhetoric.


     


    "When you're born, you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front-row seat."  - GC




    "Posting their addresses online" is unacceptable and outrageous...


    Of course, gay activists have used far worse nasty tactics to "out" those who contributed anonymously to organizations supporting traditional marriage. Not only posting addresses online but harass and hurt their businesses...


    And the progressives lobby to find out which individuals and organizations contribute to conservative causes, so they can act like Harry Reid does to the Koch Brothers, and the IRS has done..libel, slander and harass them...


    But of course that is different......

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    And it's absolutely shameful what's been done against abortion providers and workers - threats and acts of violence, posting their addresses online, and so on.  These acts give horrible lie to non-threatening, respectful activists.

    I support the right of protest by speech NOT by violence or violent rhetoric.

     

    "When you're born, you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front-row seat."  - GC



    "Posting their addresses online" is unacceptable and outrageous...

    Of course, gay activists have used far worse nasty tactics to "out" those who contributed anonymously to organizations supporting traditional marriage. Not only posting addresses online but harass and hurt their businesses...

    And the progressives lobby to find out which individuals and organizations contribute to conservative causes, so they can act like Harry Reid does to the Koch Brothers...libel, slander and harass them...

    But of course that is different......



    A common these among those against abortion and those against gay marriage....both feel they have a right to tell others what they can or can't do with their own lives. That's insane. Why is it anyone's business if a woman decides she wants an abortion? Why is it anyone's business if two men who love each other want to marry one another just like hetero couples get to?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:


    In response to MattyScornD's comment:



     


     


    And it's absolutely shameful what's been done against abortion providers and workers - threats and acts of violence, posting their addresses online, and so on.  These acts give horrible lie to non-threatening, respectful activists.


     


    I support the right of protest by speech NOT by violence or violent rhetoric.


     


     


     


    "When you're born, you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front-row seat."  - GC


     


     




    "Posting their addresses online" is unacceptable and outrageous...


     


     


    Of course, gay activists have used far worse nasty tactics to "out" those who contributed anonymously to organizations supporting traditional marriage. Not only posting addresses online but harass and hurt their businesses...


     


    And the progressives lobby to find out which individuals and organizations contribute to conservative causes, so they can act like Harry Reid does to the Koch Brothers, and the IRS has done..libel, slander and harass them...


     


    But of course that is different......





    More strawmen.


    No surprise that you don't understand the difference between political speech, i.e. contributing money to a political cause...


    ...and harassment of someone who just happens to be doing their job at a clinic.


    Because for you, everything is political and a reason to grind ideological axes.


     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:


    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:


    In response to MattyScornD's comment:


    And it's absolutely shameful what's been done against abortion providers and workers - threats and acts of violence, posting their addresses online, and so on.  These acts give horrible lie to non-threatening, respectful activists.


    I support the right of protest by speech NOT by violence or violent rhetoric.


     


    "When you're born, you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front-row seat."  - GC




    "Posting their addresses online" is unacceptable and outrageous...


    Of course, gay activists have used far worse nasty tactics to "out" those who contributed anonymously to organizations supporting traditional marriage. Not only posting addresses online but harass and hurt their businesses...


    And the progressives lobby to find out which individuals and organizations contribute to conservative causes, so they can act like Harry Reid does to the Koch Brothers...libel, slander and harass them...


    But of course that is different......




    A common these among those against abortion and those against gay marriage....both feel they have a right to tell others what they can or can't do with their own lives. That's insane. Why is it anyone's business if a woman decides she wants an abortion? Why is it anyone's business if two men who love each other want to marry one another just like hetero couples get to?




    What's the baby's view of abortion?


    what does abortion have to do with gay marriage? Aren't those issues about as dissimilar as possible?


    what does any of this have to do with a buffer zone?


    i would say a 9-0 tells you all you need to know about the reality here.

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    What's the baby's view of abortion?

    Same as the mothers view. When your child was a baby did you ask it for its view on things or did you make the decisions for your child???

    what does abortion have to do with gay marriage? Aren't those issues about as dissimilar as possible?

    You mean other than in both cases you have someone who thinks they have the right to tell another what they should do????

    what does any of this have to do with a buffer zone?

     

    i would say a 9-0 tells you all you need to know about the reality here.




     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    I wonder how this works in states with stand your ground laws?

    and doesn't this have repercussions in other areas? Imagine if the Wall Street protesters decided to act like some of the more obnoxious anti-women's rights protesters?  Intimidating bank employees and bank customers as they go to work.  Or Union members intimidating scabs.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    What's the baby's view of abortion?

    Same as the mothers view. When your child was a baby did you ask it for its view on things or did you make the decisions for your child???

    what does abortion have to do with gay marriage? Aren't those issues about as dissimilar as possible?

    You mean other than in both cases you have someone who thinks they have the right to tell another what they should do????

    what does any of this have to do with a buffer zone?

     

    i would say a 9-0 tells you all you need to know about the reality here.






    So, I'll continue.

    free speech is messy sometimes.  

    The same people wanting to push people out of the public square for their views on abortion and/or religion had no problem with protecting the "right" of progressives to camp out on public property in locations of their choosing to protest the unfairness of success. I'm talking about the progressive AstroTurf movement called occupy Wall Street.

    can't have it both ways.  But, that is EXACTLY what the progressives want: muzzling of anyone who disagrees, protection for their point of view.  It is why they have no problem with the IRS criminal activity, as well.

    like I said, free speech is messy sometimes.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    What's the baby's view of abortion?

    Same as the mothers view. When your child was a baby did you ask it for its view on things or did you make the decisions for your child???

    what does abortion have to do with gay marriage? Aren't those issues about as dissimilar as possible?

    You mean other than in both cases you have someone who thinks they have the right to tell another what they should do????

    what does any of this have to do with a buffer zone?

     

    i would say a 9-0 tells you all you need to know about the reality here.






    So, I'll continue.

    free speech is messy sometimes.  

    The same people wanting to push people out of the public square for their views on abortion and/or religion had no problem with protecting the "right" of progressives to camp out on public property in locations of their choosing to protest the unfairness of success. I'm talking about the progressive AstroTurf movement called occupy Wall Street.

    can't have it both ways.  But, that is EXACTLY what the progressives want: muzzling of anyone who disagrees, protection for their point of view.  It is why they have no problem with the IRS criminal activity, as well.

    like I said, free speech is messy sometimes.



    No one is saying these abortion protesters should be "muzzled". I haven't seen one person post that these protesters shouldn't be able to speak. But again....what business is it of yours what some woman, who is a total stranger to you, decides to do with her own body? 

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    What's the baby's view of abortion?

    Same as the mothers view. When your child was a baby did you ask it for its view on things or did you make the decisions for your child???

    what does abortion have to do with gay marriage? Aren't those issues about as dissimilar as possible?

    You mean other than in both cases you have someone who thinks they have the right to tell another what they should do????

    what does any of this have to do with a buffer zone?

     

    i would say a 9-0 tells you all you need to know about the reality here.






    So, I'll continue.

    free speech is messy sometimes.  

    The same people wanting to push people out of the public square for their views on abortion and/or religion had no problem with protecting the "right" of progressives to camp out on public property in locations of their choosing to protest the unfairness of success. I'm talking about the progressive AstroTurf movement called occupy Wall Street.

    can't have it both ways.  But, that is EXACTLY what the progressives want: muzzling of anyone who disagrees, protection for their point of view.  It is why they have no problem with the IRS criminal activity, as well.

    like I said, free speech is messy sometimes.




    ronnie .... your elk wants to point the muzzle of a gun at anyone who doesn't agree with them ......

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    What's the baby's view of abortion?

    Same as the mothers view. When your child was a baby did you ask it for its view on things or did you make the decisions for your child???

    what does abortion have to do with gay marriage? Aren't those issues about as dissimilar as possible?

    You mean other than in both cases you have someone who thinks they have the right to tell another what they should do????

    what does any of this have to do with a buffer zone?

     

    i would say a 9-0 tells you all you need to know about the reality here.






    So, I'll continue.

    free speech is messy sometimes.  

    The same people wanting to push people out of the public square for their views on abortion and/or religion had no problem with protecting the "right" of progressives to camp out on public property in locations of their choosing to protest the unfairness of success. I'm talking about the progressive AstroTurf movement called occupy Wall Street.

    can't have it both ways.  But, that is EXACTLY what the progressives want: muzzling of anyone who disagrees, protection for their point of view.  It is why they have no problem with the IRS criminal activity, as well.

    like I said, free speech is messy sometimes.



    Hey fool.....When a woman chooses not to listen to someone else's free speech, she does not prohibit that individual's ability to express a view. While there is a right to express a view, there is no right to force it on others

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    like I said, free speech is messy sometimes.



    That's true.

    In your case, free speech is often incoherent as well.

    But that's your right, too.

     

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share