Massachusetts Responds to SCOTUS Ruling With New Abortion Clinic Protections

[DonViejo]

Source: The Wire

ARIT JOHN

A week after the Supreme Court ruled that Massachusetts's 35-foot "buffer zone" around abortion clinics was unconstitutional, lawmakers in the state are preparing new laws to protect women.

According to Politico, Gov. Deval Patrick and Attorney General Martha Coakley, both Democrats, are pushing to give police more authority to break up crowds blocking entrances, as well as pass a version of a federal law that makes it illegal to harass patients outside a clinic and a law to keep clinic driveways clear. “The Supreme Court may not have liked our buffer zone, but they did not lessen our commitment to protecting women’s access to reproductive health care in the commonwealth,” Coakley, who is running for the party's nomination for governor, said in a prepared statement.

Martha Walz, the chief executive of Planned Parenthood in Massachusetts also suggested the state pass a version of a New York law that makes it illegal to follow and harass someone within 15 meters of the premises of a clinic, according to The Boston Globe.

Last week the Supreme Court unanimously struck down a Massachusetts law that set a 35-foot "buffer zone" around clinics, on the grounds that it limited protester's First Amendment rights. "The buffer zones burden substantially more speech than necessary to achieve the Commonwealth’s asserted interests," the opinion reads. The court recommended that the state use a less "extreme" method to protect patients.

###



Read more: http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/07/massachusetts-responds-to-scotus-ruling-with-new-abortion-clinic-protections/373903/

[sheshe2]

1. Thank you

Gov. Deval Patrick and Attorney General Martha Coakley.

[BrotherIvan]

2. KEEP FIGHTING!

[Dawson Leery]

3. Only the strongest penalties will work.

It should be a felony if any of these "protesters" assault anyone.

[riqster]

5. Kick!

[hack89]

8. It already is

assault is assault.

[NutmegYankee]

13. Most assaults are not felonies.

If these terrorist fanatics so much as touch a woman they should be immediately face planted and dragged to jail.

[hack89]

15. In MA, misdemeanor assault can get you two and a half years in jail

They don't need to rewrite the assault laws.

[NutmegYankee]

19. Aren't misdemeanors capped at a maximum of one year?

A felony is any crime punishable by more than 1 year in jail.

[Starcats]

4. I can't wait to read

the new Massachusetts law. I hope that it is unassailable and that it royally pisses off those who dare to accost, abuse, heckle, and otherwise upset any woman on her way into an abortion clinic. The U.S. Supreme Court is a joke. It seems even the women Justices on the Court who supported banning the 35 foot boundary lacked common sense in this matter. Public safety is at issue here! The rulings this term have defied logic.

[PADemD]

17. Couldn't the area around the clinic be designated a noise-free zone?

That way, the protesters could wave their signs silently.

[marshall]

25. Maybe anti-protesters should pass out ear plugs and blinders

The court said they have the freedom to speak, but that doesn't mean they have to be necessarily be heard or seen.

[wercal]

6. Does anybody know the exact details of the case

Specifically the layout of the building, driveways, and parking areas...and how this relates to the '35 feet from the door'.

I can see, if a clinic fronts a public sidewalk, how protesting on the sidewalk could be directly in front of the door. However, if the clinic is in a building with its own private parking lot, can't the owners control who can and cannot get close to the door?

Is the concern over people protesting next to the driveway? Or does this ruling allow people near the door on private property, as if it were public property, because the business is open to the public? This 'public use' way of looking at businesses has been used to enforce no-smoking ordinances...and I'm wondering if something similar is being used here.

[jeff47]

14. Since they serve the public, they can only control access

one person at a time.

Let's say two protesters stand in front of the door, on private property. They are asked to leave by the clinic. If a cop happens to be there, they do so. If not, they ignore the request.

If they leave, they are shortly replaced by two other people. Who are asked to leave by the clinic. If they leave, they are shortly replaced by two other people.........

Is the concern over people protesting next to the driveway?

The driveway problem is they walk back and forth on the sidewalk, blocking the driveway. If they stopped, they could be cited. So instead they walk back and forth, pretending that they're out for a very repetitive stroll.

[wercal]

20. OK, I found a useful link

I know nothing about this website or its leanings, but it des show photographs of the buffer zones.

One clinic is in a downtown area, immediately adjacent to the sidewalk. This clinic will be greatly affected.

The other has a private lot, and the buffer zone is way out in the street. Even if eliminated, it is apparent that protestors can only get as close as the property line...still a long way from the building. Protestors will now be able to get close to cars as they enter the drive...but in this situation, they won't be able to harass people as they get out of their car.

Link:

http://theprez98.blogspot.com/2013/07/law-in-plain-english-mccullen-v-coakley.html

As far as getting people to leave is concerned...the clinic in my city used to have a security guard. And around 80% of security guards in my town are off duty cops (they get a free criminal background check every year which gives them an advantage over civilian security guards who have to pay for this)...so it shouldn't be too hard to get people to leave.

My guess would be that the downtown clinic would relocate to a place with a private parking lot.

[Ilsa]

7. Perhaps add a rule that the space held by each group

of protestors cannot exceed a certain number of feet without 10 meter breaks before there is another pack of protestors. Something that will require them to be partly splintered to allow space for people coming and going.

[katmondoo]

9. There are always creative ways around draconian laws

Go for it Mass.

[roguevalley]

10. thank you, Massachusetts for loving all of us

[santamargarita]

11. More than one way to skin a fascist pig!

Or 5 fascist pigs!

[davidpdx]

12. In my opinion they should make it any clinic or hospital, not just abortion clinics

Making it a narrow exception to abortion clinics is one way to create vulnerability in the law. I believe that the new law is going to end up back in court the minute it passes.

[Fred Sanders]

16. Is is legal to follow and harass people outside 15 meters of.....anywhere? Time to enforce the laws

on the books, or get them written in.

[NutmegYankee]

21. The anti-choice terror movement is very careful to not make their acts look illegal.

I've served as an escort for women into a clinic. Those people are so rabid I'm surprised they aren't put down for rabies testing.

[A Simple Game]

18. Here is the solution.

We the people of Massachusetts believing that all people have equal value and rights; and to protect the rights of first amendment protesters we hereby set the buffer zones around clinics to be no more, no less, but equal to the ones around the Supreme Court building in Washington DC.

Let hear them say that is illegal!

[valerief]

22. I think women should be brought in (and out) on stretchers (or gurneys).

The patient could wear headphones to block the noise and a sheet over her face.

That'd be some picture. A Christozombie screaming at a woman on a stretcher. Nice.

[freshwest]

23. Thank you, Massachusetts!

[Cha]

24. This is so good, Don! Thank you!