It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The new ruling could have national impact on the practice of erecting buffer zones and public protest zones. It could open others to question, such as those outside polling places, political conventions, funeral services -- even the court's own plaza.
After a federal district judge ruled last year that a 1949 law barring demonstrations on court property was unconstitutional, the court quickly issued a regulation that has the same effect. Roberts — who did not speak at all during oral arguments in the abortion case — approved the regulation.
McCullen and other abortion opponents have sought for years to waylay women on their way to getting abortions by offering advice and alternatives.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Aleister
Did you post this accidentally?
This OP needs some skin on its bones!
originally posted by: Helious
My feeling is you should be able to practice free speech in any public place if you are not barring people from entering or exiting. This includes speech that I don't agree with or even despise. Such is necessary to protect the integrity and spirit of the first Amendment.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Aleister
Okay, so the Supremes ruled that protesters, et al, only need to be 8 feet away from the event that they are protesting. That means Westboro Baptist funeral protests won't be kept away from service family members?
What remains to be seen is whether the new ruling could have national impact on the practice of erecting buffer zones and public protest zones. It could open others to question, such as those outside polling places, political conventions, funeral services -- even the court's own plaza.
originally posted by: lightedhype
Well I am glad for this decision. I for one think most women going into said clinics could probably USE a good 45 seconds of accosting.
On the matter at hand then, I personally think that the decision by the court is a sensible one. While I am of the opinion that a nation which has proper separation between church and state, has no business telling a woman that she may not have an abortion, I also believe that people who believe otherwise have a right to make their point, and so this is an appropriate compromise.
originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: youdidntseeme
This gives them enough distance to spit and scream at the women going in for one.
This will cause much upset.
Just let women do what they want to do...no one has any right to make them do something they do not want to do.