High court stays out of Mass. abortion clinic case

[Ian David]

Source: AP Via MSNBC

updated 39 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to a Massachusetts law that creates a protest-free zone around the entrances and driveways of abortion clinics.

The justices offered no comment Monday in turning down an appeal from anti-abortion protesters who object to the state-imposed protest-free zone of 35 feet outside clinic entrances. Abortion opponents complained that the law violates their free speech rights and forces them into the street, where they've nearly been hit by cars while trying to dissuade pregnant women from entering the clinics.

State Attorney General Martha Coakley, recently defeated in her U.S. Senate bid, has defended the law as enhancing public safety while still giving protesters the right to express themselves.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35983718

---

Hat-tip to: http://twitter.com/IanDavidB/status/10874963523

[tammywammy]

1. k&r

[chelsea0011]

2. "Hit by Cars"? I live in Mass and can honestly say that not only have I never

read about that in any papers, but also, adults who are out in the traffic are not only breaking the jay walking law, they risk getting hit by cars. Didn't your moms tell you to not go out in the street?

[Ian David]

6. ALMOST hit by cars. ALMOST. n/t

[nykym]

8. I think

we should employ the Jaywalking laws to get rid of unwanted protesters. Can you just imagine the look on thier faces when they get handed a summons to appear in court 3 months later and they live in Utah! LOL!

[jmm]

29. I don't know how true this but

supposedly a cop told someone I know the reason that jaywalking laws aren't enforced here is because it's only a $3 fine.

[Heywood J]

31. It's only a buck in Boston.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/08/06/punishable_by_a_fine_of_1/
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-18a.htm

The fine is spelled out in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 90, Section 18A, which states that communities can punish pedestrians who break local jaywalking rules ``by a fine of one dollar for the first, second or third such offense . . . and by a fine of two dollars for the fourth or subsequent such offense so committed in such calendar year."

You get fined more for giving the cop a false name...

[Soylent Brice]

3. excellent news.

[SPedigrees]

4. Good news! nt

[The Magistrate]

5. 'Where They've Nearly Been Hit By Cars', Sir? We Should Be So Lucky....

[Tailormyst]

32. I haven't resorted to aiming my car at them

But I do flip them off at least once a day while they parade around with their lies and propaganda.

[msanthrope]

7. Is there a special Darwin Award category for getting hit by a car

and killed while trying to harass people on their way to a medical procedure?

If not, there should be....

[Union Yes]

9. Good K&R nt

[No Elephants]

10. AP's phrasing is poor. The SCOTUS did not reject a challenge. They simply refused to hear the appeal

The SCOTUS has said we are not to impute substantive meaning into their refusals.

Glad to see Coakley doing this, though. She may have been great at candidacy, but she is doing good things where she is.

Now, to find a Democrat who can beat Brown in a couple three years.

[paulsby]

11. fwiw, one can support abortion rights while ALSO fully supporting

the right of protest, to include parading around neighborhoods displaying signs of aborted fetuses (a recent case) etc.

protest is an essential part of the democratic process and free speech..

fwiw, i USED to be anti-choice. i listened to both sides and changed my mind.

the question to me is - does 35 ft properly balance rights?

i think it does. look at a football field. that's a little over 10 yrds.

one can engage in effective protest from the distance.

i would like to see consistency. for example, would a 35 ft zone law for military recruiting centers be reasonable? i would say yes.

as long as there is consistency

[AlbertCat]

13. one can engage in effective protest from the distance.

Indeed.

It's closer than Bush's "Free Speech Zones".

But it's not close enough to obstruct and hinder and harass patients going to the clinic.... which is the real problem, right?

[paulsby]

14. i see both sides

just because i am pro choice i do not think people who protest abortion are "obstructing and harassing" people entering a clinic any more than those who protest the war and protest outside recruiting centers are "obstructing and harassing" those entering the facility.

it's about a BALANCE act, as most of these types of legal decisions are.

i think 35 ft is a "fair buffer". i just want to see it equally applied to protesters at other types of sites, like military recruiting centers etc. that would enhance the notion that such buffers are "content neutral". iow, it's not WHAT the people are protesting or what rights people are exercising that determines whether 35 ft is reasonable

[Scout]

16. have you ever actually been to an attempted clinic blockade?

"i do not think people who protest abortion are "obstructing and harassing" people entering a clinic"
they don't when the police are watching, but they most definitely DO obstruct and harass when they think they are unobserved.

[paulsby]

18. yes, i have

i've worked them from the law enforcement side.

so, you are correct, in that i can't state as to what they do when cops aren't present, since i was present AS a uniformed cop. (i have worked undercover, but not a a clinic protest)

look, of course there are SOME protesters who are going to cross the line

but that's hardly unique to clinic protests. it happens at anti-war protests, anti-WTO protests, heck pretty much any kind of protest.

one punishes those who transgress the law, not an entire group because some outliers violate the rules

imo, 35 ft is reasonable.

[kestrel91316]

38. Sounds like you've never been to a clinic "blockade". I used to work clinic defense

back in the 80's, and "obstructing and harrassing" wasn't the HALF of it. One of the bastards had a huge TV camera that he deliberately smacked me on top of the head with.

[paulsby]

43. sounds to me like i have been to one

as mentioned in other post.

never got bonk bonked on the head though

[CBHagman]

44. Here in DC they get right up in people's faces.

Mind you, I've only seen mild protests -- usually an elderly guy with a rosary and pamphlets following a woman to the door of Planned Parenthood. PP of course has escorts (identifiable by their orange pinnies) waiting to lead the women inside, but the protesters are not only on the property, they may approach people attempting to enter the office.

I don't know what the legal restrictions are, but in this case both groups are small and they appear to coexist.

[Thothmes]

30. Or like the Free Speech Zones at the 2004 Democratic

Convention.

[paulsby]

34. or those that mayor schell set up during the WTO

where he (unconstitutionally needless to say) set up "no protest zones" in downtown seattle

of course mayor schell was a complete moron, so what do you expect?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

15. Self delete.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

20. I have no problem to admit I was wrong. Yes, that post expresses agreement with the ruling.

That'll teach me to ALWAYS read the entire post instead of the two first sentences and then extrapolate from the tone.

[paulsby]

35. good for you

by having no problem admitting you are wrong, you fit into a tiny, elite and ADULT minority on the internet in general, and on this site in particular

[KamaAina]

19. Do anti-military protesters routinely harass potential recruits?

'Cause the anti's sure as hell harass women.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

26. That's called the false equivalence fallacy. Something I failed to see at my first reading.

(slaps self's forehead again for good measure)

[paulsby]

36. it's also largely irrelevant

the issue is largely about a balancing act.

those entering military recruiting centers have the same right of ingress and egress as those entering a planned parenthood clinic, etc.

some assmunches protesting clinics certainly violate the law. heck, it wasn't too long ago that a military protestor SHOT and killed somebody at a military recruiting center

remember?

regardless, if a 35 ft buffer is reasonable for a clinic ( as i think it is ) it's reasonable for a recruiting center

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. No, I don't remember. Link? -nt

[paulsby]

40. here ya go

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/us/02recruit.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-06-01-army-recruiter-killed_N.htm

in addition to this attack...
note: Army recruiting officials said they could not recall any recent fatal attacks on Army recruiting offices. But bomb threats and vandalism against recruiting offices are not uncommon. Last year, a small bomb shattered the glass facade of the military recruiting station in Times Square

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

41. Congratulations! You found one!

Yes, there are 4-leaf clovers. Of course, the vast majority of clovers still have only 3 leaves.

[paulsby]

42. one MURDER

there have been multiple bombings and threats.

regardless, what's your point?

why should those entering a clinic have a buffer to protect them and those entering a recruiting station NOT?

are you for equal protection or not?

[Rwalsh]

12. Is it good news?

The idea of the government telling us we can't get within 35 feet of a business we want to protest?

That law, btw, applies to all protesters, not just the anti-abortion ones.

I don't know.

[Ian David]

28. We've had laws protecting houses of worship similarly for over a hundred years. n/t

[NJmaverick]

21. High court stays out of Mass. abortion clinic case

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to a Massachusetts law that creates a protest-free zone around the entrances and driveways of abortion clinics.
The justices offered no comment Monday in turning down an appeal from anti-abortion protesters who object to the state-imposed protest-free zone of 35 feet outside clinic entrances. Abortion opponents complained that the law violates their free speech rights and forces them into the street, where they've nearly been hit by cars while trying to dissuade pregnant women from entering the clinics.
State Attorney General Martha Coakley, recently defeated in her U.S. Senate bid, has defended the law as enhancing public safety while still giving protesters the right to express themselves.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100322/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_abortion_buffer_zone;_ylt=AtYqkk4Z9NpxcRCSPy.dlaWs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFlc3MzZWcxBHBvcwM4MwRzZWMDYWNjb3JkaW9uX3BvbGl0aWNzBHNsawNoaWdoY291cnRzdGE-

---

I have to admit that I am pleasantly surprised the horrible republicans on the SC didn't poke their noses into this one.

[secondwind]

22. I'm a recently appointed clinic escort in MA. I live in Boston. Have yet to

help out in this regard (boy, did they go through all my history with a fine toothed comb!!!).....and I'm proud that I will be able to volunteer when I am needed in the future, without being subjected to so much hassles!

[David__77]

24. I was a clinic escort at 16.

There was no vetting at all. We were mostly teenagers and early 20s actually, and it was rough going, but we were helpful to the women and keep those monsters in line.

[David__77]

23. Maybe they should stop harassing medical patients.

If they're lingering in the street, then isn't that like jaywalking? Cite them.

Incidentally, I have great footage of my friend egging these types from his car. Hilarious reactions...

[Poll_Blind]

25. I am against all such "protest-free zones". Odius speech is odius speech but...

...I'd rather hold my nose to avoid the stench than to set a precedent, convenient to me and my beliefs in the short term, but which could be used against me in the long.

PB

[dballance]

27. The right to free speech is not absolute.

I believe there is a huge difference between political speech that should not be restricted as it was in the protest zones during W Bush's years and the kind of coercive, harassing "speech" the anti-abortion movement uses. They certainly have a right to their opinion and speech. They don't have a right to harass and impede people from getting medical care.

It's not as if these clinics only perform abortions. There is no "abortion-mill" out there. They provide women with other health care as well. Women should not have to be afraid to seek health care. That's just wrong.

They must be stopped. First they'll go for Roe v. Wade and next they'll for Griswold v. Connecticut. The latter case is the one that established the right to have access to birth control. That was in 1965 - not that long ago. Can you believe that only 45 years ago a state made birth control illegal? Sounds crazy doesn't it?

[paulsby]

37. they must NOT be stopped

it's called free speech

DEAL WITH IT.

the issue is "is a 35 ft zone an unreasonable buffer such that it violates the 1st amendment ?"

i would say no. which is why i support the buffer.

fwiw, free speech is often harassing.

if you are entering a clinic, and somebody calls you a "baby killer" , is that harassment? sure. in most senses of the word. it's also constitutionally protected free speech.

ditto if you are a uniformed officer entering a recruiting center, and somebody calls you a "baby killer".

free speech means you necessarily have to deal with offensive, harassing speech.

i recall during N30 protests, a couple of idiots stood in front of my partner (uniformed in full riot gear) and called him a "f*cking N****er" over and over again.

they were not arrested or detained. they were within their rights.

free speech is often offensive.

abortion is legal, as it should be.

but it is, and should be 100% legal to protest, to call clinic patients names, etc. that's free speech

[pennylane100]

33. how come they have only "nearly been hit by cars"

what is wrong with the drivers of Massachusetts, can they not aim better.