Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Politics

SCOTUS turns down abortion clinic buffer zone challenge, Thomas slams ‘abdication’ of duty

by February 24, 2025
February 24, 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear a pro-life challenge against protest restrictions around abortion clinics in Illinois, as activists argued the laws infringe on their First Amendment rights, a decision met with a fiery dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas.

The court rejected appeals from Coalition Life, which describes itself as ‘America’s Largest Professional Sidewalk Counseling Organization’ in New Jersey and Illinois, which had challenged previous lower court rulings that dismissed their lawsuits. 

Pro-life activists in the case argued that ‘buffer zones’ – which were established after a previous Supreme Court decision in Colorado to shield patients from harassment – around abortion clinics violate their First Amendment rights to free speech.

Thomas and fellow conservative Justice Samuel Alito dissented, with Thomas arguing SCOTUS should have taken up the case, Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale, Illinois. Alito did not explain his reasoning in writing.

The votes of four justices are required to grant a writ of certiorari to bring a case up for review.

Thomas said Hill v. Colorado ‘has been seriously undermined, if not completely eroded, and our refusal to provide clarity is an abdication of our judicial duty.’ He added that he would’ve used the Coalition Life case to override the Hill decision.

‘This case would have allowed us to provide needed clarity to lower courts,’ Thomas wrote in his dissent.

In that case, decided in 2000, the Supreme Court upheld a Colorado statute that prohibited individuals from ‘knowingly’ approaching within eight feet of another person within 100 feet of a healthcare facility entrance, without consent, for purposes such as passing out literature, displaying signs, or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling. 

The court determined this law was a content-neutral regulation of the time, place and manner of speech, serving the state’s interest in protecting individuals entering healthcare facilities from unwanted communication. The decision was 6-3, with Justices Thomas, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy dissenting.

The City of Carbondale, in southern Illinois, saw an uptick in pro-life protests after two clinics opened following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022. As such, the city passed ordinances modeled after Colorado’s statutes.

Urging the court to revisit the Hill precedent, Thomas quoted from an excerpt in Alito’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Center – the case that overturned Roe v. Wade – where he noted that abortion-related cases on other legal precedents had ‘distorted First Amendment doctrines.’

One key case that followed Hill v. Colorado is McCullen v. Coakley, where the Supreme Court ruled in 2014 on a Massachusetts law that established a 35-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics. The high court found that while the state had a legitimate interest in protecting patients and staff from harassment, the law was overly broad, included too much space and infringed on free speech rights.

The court struck down the law, distinguishing it from the Hill decision.

In 2019, New York upheld a 15-foot buffer zone law outside of clinics, and similar laws have been debated in states like California, Maryland and Washington.

Fox News Digital has reached out to Coalition Life for comment. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
US-Ukraine rift breaks out at United Nations on 3rd anniversary of the war
next post
DOGE cuts, Medicaid fears spark protests at GOP lawmaker offices across US

You may also like

Demonic John Fetterman: Murderers Serving Time in Prison...

October 21, 2022

Squad Dem launches wild rant defending ‘wokeness’, says...

January 13, 2023

San Francisco Plans To Use Robots Capable of...

November 26, 2022

Morning Glory: What ‘Masters of the Air’ teaches...

March 19, 2024

AK Gov. Mike Dunleavy proposes plan to capitalize...

January 13, 2023

New whistleblower claims on first Trump assassination attempt...

September 16, 2024

Planned Parenthood in Kansas announces telemedicine abortions

December 20, 2022

New York City comptroller rejects $432 million no-bid...

September 7, 2023

Biden ad touting personal accountability resurfaces after claiming...

May 22, 2023

Former Federal Prosecutor Defending J6 Clients To Bring...

November 19, 2022

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Friday Feature: Savannah Legacy Academy

      June 27, 2025
    • The Supreme Court Is Right on Reading Opt-Outs, But That’s Not Enough

      June 27, 2025
    • Barrett eviscerates Jackson, Sotomayor takes on a ‘complicit’ court in contentious final opinions

      June 27, 2025
    • Trump would strike Iran ‘without question’ if it restarts nuclear weapons program

      June 27, 2025
    • Florida man indicted for ’86’ posts allegedly threatening to kill Alina Habba

      June 27, 2025
    • Top House Republicans send stern warning to Senate GOP as Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ risks delay

      June 27, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,329)
    • Investing (2,079)
    • Politics (15,835)
    • Stocks (3,174)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved