Despite the 3-2 committee vote against the patient safety zone, it could still pass in a floor vote because of New Hampshire’s unusual legislative process.
What relatively peaceful anti-choice protesters may not understand is that their behavior is relative: They’re a physical representation of threats that have already been made, and in some cases executed, in the past and online.
There’s a growing conflict between states that recognize a fundamental right to make end-of-life decisions and those that override those wishes only when a person is pregnant.
A state senate committee heard arguments this week for enacting a 25-foot patient safety zone, while several anti-choice bills have been introduced in the house.
The Roberts Court may be skeptical of buffer zones around abortion clinics, but the rest of the country doesn’t seem to be.
Ald. Lisa Subeck plans to introduce an ordinance that would create a buffer zone of 160 feet around health-care facilities in the city while banning protesters from being within eight feet of a person entering a clinic, punishable by a fine of up to $750.
In Supreme Court arguments over buffer zones and gun restrictions, the Roberts Court cut women victims out of the equation.
Though the fate of buffer zone laws now rests with the Supreme Court, New Hampshire legislators decided not to wait to try to protect patients.
The issue here is safety. Buffer zones reduce the very real threats of violence and intimidation that abortion providers and their patients face every day.
An abortion clinic owner says her staff was sent into a “panic” Wednesday morning after suspicious envelopes were found taped to facility doors. The false alarm came the same day the Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments challenging a buffer zone law designed to protect patients and clinic workers from anti-choice protesters.