The Supreme Court's 8-0 decision rejecting attempts to use racketeering laws against abortion clinic protesters was hailed by one of the successful petitioners as a victory for free speech.
It was the third time the high court had ruled in the case, which dates back to 1986 when the National Organization for Women attempted to use racketeering laws in class-action lawsuits against abortion clinic protesters.
The Feb. 28 ruling (with new Justice Samuel Alito Jr. not participating) reversed the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' interpretation of the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in the case. The lower court had found that the Supreme Court's decision for Joseph Scheidler and Operation Rescue neglected to deal with four out of 121 instances in which a jury had found abortion protesters violated laws that prohibit acts or threats of violence to person or property.
Scheidler, who heads the Pro-Life Action League, said in a statement that he is "mystified that I had to go to the trouble and expense of appearing before the Supreme Court three times. The court was right when they ruled in 2003, but the National Organization for Women refused to acknowledge defeat."
In the latest decision, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that to violate the Hobbs Act --- a 55-year-old law prohibiting extortion --- physical violence or threats of violence must be related to extortion.
In the 2003 ruling, the Supreme Court had found that the protests did not constitute extortion under the Hobbs Act because they did not involve attempts to obtain property. The court also said there was no basis for claims under the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
A nationwide injunction against the protesters has been in place since 1998, after a Chicago jury said demonstrators broke the racketeering law by interfering with clinic operations, menacing doctors, assaulting patients and damaging clinic property.
When the case was remanded to the 7th Circuit, that court said the Supreme Court had not been asked to consider the four instances in which there had been instances or threats of physical violence unrelated to extortion and ordered a District Court to consider whether those might be violations of the Hobbs Act.
Again the case came to the Supreme Court, and Breyer wrote that "physical violence unrelated to robbery or extortion falls outside the scope of the Hobbs Act."
The latest consideration of the case had drawn the attention of a wide assortment of activist organizations, ranging from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to Pax Christi USA, which argued that if the Hobbs Act was allowed to be applied to social protests the financial costs could bankrupt protesters and effectively stifle such civil actions.
In his statement, Scheidler said, "The Supreme Court seems to take the First Amendment more seriously than the (circuit courts) do."
Operation Rescue president Troy Newman said after 20 years his organization was pleased to "see this case put behind us once and for all."
In a statement, Newman said, "This is a victory not only for pro-lifers, who can now exercise their First Amendment rights to speak out about abortion without fear of a RICO suit, but it is also a victory for the women and babies who are entering our nation's abortion mills, who now will have greater access to more information and practical assistance that can help them spare the lives of their pre-born children."
---CNS |