Supreme Court voids 35-foot abortion clinic protest buffer

Fox News ^ | 06.26.2014 | FOX

[dware]

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has struck down a 35-foot protest-free zone outside abortion clinics in Massachusetts. The justices were unanimous Thursday that extending a buffer zone 35 feet from clinic entrances violates the First Amendment rights of protesters. ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Chief Justice John Roberts says authorities have less intrusive ways to deal with problems outside the clinics.

[Viennacon]

Take that, babykillers! We’re gonna be in your face!

[Tom Cullen]

I suspect Roberts “gave” on this one because he will side against Hobby Lobby on Monday.

[Sam Gamgee]

Finally! Some one gets it. It was a clear violation of freedom of speech.

[1010RD]

Duh.

[1010RD]

Well, it’s very difficult to go kill your baby with people calling you to Christ.

[fifedom]

The majority (Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan) wrote a very narrow opinion—

---

Roberts is turning out badly for conservatives. He is basically a politician trying to make the Supremes look good and not deciding cases on their merit. This is obvious in the Obamacare decision where he knew that they would get major pushback if they invalidated the law. We also saw this in the CA traditional marriage Prop 8 case. Kennedy and the (other) leftists were ready right then and there to declare that the Constitution demands marriage be re-defined. He recruited Scalia and others to dodge the issue by saying that the Prop 8 defenders did not have standing. It’s not that he sees anything wrong with Kennedy’s views but doing it then would make the Supremes look bad so he will just wait a few years until the politics look better.

[leapfrog0202]

Even the “wise Latina”???? I’m shocked!!!!

---

My exact thought. Amazed it was unanimous.

[HOYA97]

Two big decisions today. Both unanimous. Amazing.

Remember what happened the last few years. A few good decisions and then the really really bad decision.

[topher]

Oops! Colorado law is still intact. SCOTUS ruled that narrow, floating buffer zones are still legal.

But it is the fact that it was such a large area where FREE SPEECH was banned that caused this to be struck down...

[topher]

Hill v. Colorado has been "limited" by the decision today.

Additionally, the decision today is Cullen v. Coakley (not Oakley as I ha erroneously posted)...

[Friendofgeorge]

Beautiful !

[Friendofgeorge]

Beautiful !

[ColdOne]

Remember what happened the last few years. A few good decisions and then the really really bad decision. I remember that. I think that is the way it will play out this time as well.

[zerosix]

Yet another example of “celebrating the First Amendment” available to.......some, sometimes.

[BlackElk]

Defendant is Taxachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley (with a C). She lost the Senate race to Scott Brown.

[BlackElk]

Rolling Thunder type bikers can control Westboro “Baptist” Church types and cops can look the other way! Pro-lifers are OTOH the Salt of the Earth.

[Coleus]

 

BREAKING: Supreme Court Unanimously Strikes Down Abortion Clinic "Buffer Zone" Law

Supreme Court strikes down ‘buffer zones’ at abortion clinics

Supreme Court unanimously rejects abortion clinic buffer zones (details)

Supreme Court voids 35-foot abortion clinic protest buffer

[topher]

The case is McCullen v. Coakley

[topher]

That was mentioned when the arguments for this case were ORALLY here on January 15, 2014 in this case.

Thanks!

[topher]

Formal title of case:

McCullen v. Coakley (short title)

No. 12-1168

Long Title:

Eleanor McCullen, et al., Petitioners
v.
Martha Coakley, Attorney General of Massachusetts, et al.

Link to SCOTUS page on this page with full history:

DocketFile 12-1168