Surprise! The Supreme Court gave us a good piece of news about abortion
This piece first appeared in our weekly newsletter, The Fallout.
It’s rare the Supreme Court delivers good news related to abortion rights and access, but this week, the Court declined to take up a pair of cases that anti-choice activists had hoped would upend the last remaining precedent protecting clinics, patients, and providers from the most aggressive and hostile clinic protesters.
At issue is the durability of Hill v. Colorado, a 2000 Supreme Court decision that upheld a Colorado law that requires protesters get consent before coming within eight feet of anyone to speak to them or distribute pamphlets within 100 feet of a health-care facility, including an abortion clinic. The anti-choice movement had set up two cases, one from Illinois and the other from New Jersey, to challenge Hill. If successful, they would have given abortion clinic protesters a green light to dramatically increase clinic protests and harass patients trying to access care.
Thankfully, that didn’t happen. The Court rejected both cases on Monday. This means that clinic protest laws in Colorado are safe for now. The Court’s decision was dissented by Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito, who said they would take the case to Hill. They would have, of course. In fact, the Justice Department has already issued guidance saying it will reserve enforcing Federal Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act prosecutions and civil actions only in “extraordinary circumstances.” And let’s not forget that the flurry of first-month criminal pardons issued by Trump included a handful of clinic protesters, including one who had forcibly entered abortion clinics and assaulted staff, according to court documents and reporting by Mother Jones.
There’s every reason to expect a renewed wave of abortion-clinic violence under this presidential administration. The Supreme Court gave abortion providers and patients a rare respite by denying these challenges against protest zone laws.
