The Supreme Court requested the liquidation of protest-free zones for abortion clinics

Abortion opponents note that when the Supreme Court overturned Roe. v. Wade, the justices also criticized an earlier ruling on protest-free zones in clinics.

WASHINGTON – A few days after Supreme Court in 2022 overturned constitutional right to abortion, a New York county passed a law prohibiting anti-abortion activists from contacting women outside abortion clinics.

When a religious group asked the Supreme Court to intervene, Westchester County officials pushed back on the restrictions and judges declined to get involved in the case last year.

Now anti-abortion groups are urging judges not to fall for another “bait and switch.”

They asked the Supreme Court to hear a challenge to a similar law in Carbondale, Illinois, which was struck down as the case went to the Supreme Court.

Anti-abortion groups, as well as many Republican attorneys general, want the justices to use it to overturn the 2000 decision in Hill v. Colorado, which upheld restrictions on protests around abortion clinics.

“It is time for the Court to restore the constitutional rights eviscerated by Hill, and this case provides an excellent opportunity to do so,” Paul Clement, a former U.S. attorney general who argued and represents more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court, wrote the anti-abortion group Coalition in a filing. Life.

Close enough to provide visual contact compared to an 8-foot buffer

The Missouri-based group Coalition Life says its members must approach women to make eye contact when they advocate against abortion.

In Hill v. Colorado, the court ruled 6-3 that Colorado could prevent activists from coming within eight feet of another person in a 30-foot zone surrounding a health care facility.

The justices kept that decision intact in 2014, when knocked down 35-meter protest-free zone outside abortion clinics in Massachusetts.

Alito slammed the 2000 decision, overturning Roe

However, the court overturned the 2000 ruling, invalidating it Roe V. Wade in 2022. Criticizing the impact of abortion cases on other areas of law, – wrote Justice Samuel Alito that Hill “perverted First Amendment doctrine.”

Instead of taking it as the warning it was intended to be, anti-abortion groups say, some municipalities ignored it.

Officials in Westchester County, New York, implemented restrictions similar to those in place in Hill.

A Catholic “sidewalk counselor” challenged the policy, saying it violated her First Amendment right to talk face-to-face with women who come to a Planned Parenthood clinic.

The restrictions were upheld by an appeals court, relying on a 2000 Supreme Court ruling. But when the Becket Religious Freedom Fund asked the Supreme Court to review the 2000 decision, district officials lifted the restrictions. Their reversal was supported by Planned Parenthood, which agreed with the county that the restrictions were both unnecessary and difficult to enforce.

The Becket Fund, however, drew the Supreme Court’s attention to the fact that the district attorney had hoped the bill would not be subject to Supreme Court review because “I think we know what the Supreme Court would rule if the case ever came to fruition.” “

Still, judges declined to take up the case last year.

Now they get another chance to overturn their 2000 decision.

Illinois city responds to increase in abortion protests

The southern Illinois town of Carbondale saw an increase in anti-abortion protests after the opening of two reproductive health centers for women from nearby states that restricted abortions following the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling.

City officials responded by implementing restrictions modeled after those in Colorado. But the city council repealed the ordinance in July, before anyone was charged with violating it.

City attorneys told the Supreme Court they determined that existing laws provide sufficient protection against “inappropriate conduct.”

Carbondale lawyers say claims by anti-abortion groups that the ordinance was overturned to avoid Supreme Court involvement are mere speculation. In any case, they added, the city has the right to reconsider its position for any reason.

Those accusing foul play included the attorneys general of Kentucky and 14 other states.

“If the Court again agrees to the repeal strategy, then each government will have a plan to follow if it wants,” they told the court in their filing. “He can pass a law modeled after Hill, make it effective for a year or two or more while the legal challenge is pending in the lower courts, and then overturn it when the case goes to the Court. And all the while, Hill remains on the registry.

Buffer zone in New Jersey city also before the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court could decide soon whether to accept the case and also send another challenge to New Jersey.

An anti-abortion activist, represented by the American Center for Law and Justice, is challenging a 2014 ordinance in Englewood, New Jersey, that created a buffer zone free from protests around some health care facilities. The buffer prevents people from coming within 8 feet of the clinic entrances.

Based in Philadelphia 3^rd In January, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the restrictions were narrowly tailored, did not violate protesters’ First Amendment rights and were less restrictive than those imposed by the Supreme Court in 2000.

But prosecutors will continue to ask the Supreme Court to intervene, Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice told the court, until the 2000 decision is overturned.