Anticipating a loss this summer before the Roberts Court in the marriage equality cases, conservatives are now leaning on the precedent set by Hobby Lobby and McCullen v. Coakley.
A federal court in Pennsylvania was the first to uphold an abortion clinic buffer zone ordinance since the Supreme Court called into question the constitutionality of similar laws last summer.
Passed unanimously by the city Board of Supervisors, the ordinance is meant to mitigate the effects of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June buffer zone ruling.
The Freedom Rides are a powerful symbol, but we—and Stop Patriarchy, which began an “Abortion Rights Freedom Ride” on July 30—should think deeply about what they mean in conversation with the history of abortion rights.
Currently, Pennsylvania has two enacted buffer zones, in Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, and a proposed bill to establish buffer zones across the state. But like the legal fate of buffer zones in the country following the McCullen decision, the bill remains “in limbo.”
The bill, known as An Act to Promote Public Safety and Protect Access to Reproductive Health Care Facilities, was rushed through the legislature after the state’s buffer zone law was struck down in June.
The legislation was filed in direct response to the Supreme Court’s McCullen v. Coakley decision, which found Massachusetts’ 35-foot buffer zone law to be unconstitutional. Gov. Deval Patrick has supported the legislation from the beginning and is expected to sign it.
Called “An Act to Promote Public Safety and Protect Access to Reproductive Health Care Facilities,” the bill was proposed in response to a June Supreme Court ruling that dealt a blow to buffer zone advocates.
Reading the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Massachusetts buffer zone case, you might get the idea that free speech in the form of protests and handing out literature about social and political issues is practiced without restriction in the United States. But that is not the case.
I have seen countless women reduced to tears and shaking, just for trying to access the health care to which they are constitutionally entitled. That isn’t peaceful assembly. That is harassment, hiding behind the First Amendment.