Six pro-life women are suing the city of Burlington in federal court, claiming an ordinance that bans protests within 35 feet of Planned Parenthood and other abortion and health clinics is an unconstitutional violation of free speech.
The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Burlington on Tuesday challenges an ordinance passed in July that creates a fixed buffer zone with a radius of 35 feet from the premises of reproductive health care facilities. Violators can be fined up to $500 per offense.
The plaintiffs are six women from around Vermont who demonstrate regularly outside the Planned Parenthood clinic with signs, prayer, singing and literature. They oppose abortion, the lawsuit says, as well as artificial birth control because “they believe it harms women.”
The women want to offer “sidewalk counseling” to women entering Planned Parenthood but say the buffer zone requires them to stand at a distance where people entering the clinic can’t read their signs or take their brochures. The lawsuit notes that several of the woman are mothers and grandmothers who have experienced emotional trauma from past abortions and miscarriages and want to share those experiences with women entering the clinic.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Is Connecticut-based constitutional lawyer Michael J. DePrimo identified as an attorney in good standing in the state of Vermont? According to the Vermont Judiciary database with the title, “Attorneys in Good Standing as of September 19, 2012”, the answer is no. http://www.vermontjudiciary.or…
What an ironic name pro-lifer is. These people are quite the opposite.
These people need to find a job or something productive to keep them busy. what kind of person has all day to hang around harassing people like this? They could raise funds and pool their resources if they really do care and want to offer “counseling services” as they claim and rent a place nearby or set up shop in a church and advertise their services for what they are and legitimize themselves but instead they just bother everyone walking down the sidewalk trying to get through their day and waste valuable court time and money because they really aren’t caring people but are just a bunch of fanatics hell bent on making everyone see the world as they want them to see it and live by their rules. It’s not just the people who come and go from Planned Parenthood and work there who are inconvenienced by them it’s everyone in the neighborhood and passers by in cars and walking that are being intruded upon. they have to learn that one person’s right to swing their fist ends where my nose begins. What they are trying to do in legitimize their intolerance and it’s costing the citizens of Vermont money we can ill afford to waste these days by tying up the court system with their petty grievances.
It doesn’t matter whether you agree with these pro-lifers or disagree with them (as I happen to do); it’s pretty clear that their constitutional rights are being violated. Kicking people off public property because the content of their messages is upsetting is unconstitutional, morally repellent, and another step toward a nation of sheep.
And is anyone surprised to find that the law is unevenly enforced?
Vile as their tactics are I agree with their right to free speech. This country is built on dissent. Restricting their speech is no different than requiring protest zones as happened during the Bush years.
I don’t buy the free speech argument.
Free speech does not protect harassment, violence, or invasions of privacy which are common strategies the “Pro-Life” movement employs against women seeking who are seeking healthcare and the Doctors who provide it.
The buffer zone is clearly NOT a violation of free speech. 1st amendment protections do not extend to protect hate speech, harassment, and verbal violence. Through the passage of the buffer zone, the city has chosen to recognize that all people deserve to get the medical care they deserve without interference and coercion. The state has rightfully chosen to value the emotional and physical safety of women pursuing abortion services over the interests of anti-choice groups like CareNet. These anti-choice groups peddle lies and promote medically inaccurate information about abortion services. The real 1st amendment issue here is that anti-choice groups like CareNet do not have the constitutional right to LIE to women.
Protesting in front of CareNet as Fed Up Vermont has done is not a violation of the ordinance because the ordinance refers to medical facilities. CareNet is a fake pregnancy clinic that is not a medical facility. It offers over the counter pregnancy tests that can be bought in any drug store and a lot of Christian propaganda for abstinence and mandatory motherhood. If the fetus fetishists care so much about life why don I ever see them at the anti war demonstrations or why don’t they protest any number of carcinogens being produced by US corporations that are hurting childrens health. They are only interested in limiting female freedom.
It’s 35 feet, they can clearly still speak and they don’t even need to do so loudly to have anyone who walks by hear it. Not a violation of free speech.
I support entirely their right to speak as they wish, even if I don’t agree with the message, and that right has not been taken away. Had they been banned all together that would be a different story.
Counseling is health care, even if we disagree with the orientation of the counselor and there is a bunch of religious literature in the lobby.
I agree with you that abortion should be legal, but there is no constitutional right against receiving anti-abortion messages, or any other messages. The City of Burlington has passed an ordinance meant to ensure free passage to and from Planned Parenthood and I would imagine that the courts will uphold it. However, I also suspect that these protesters are goodhearted people, and their right to speak is as fundamental as my wife’s right to an abortion.