Massachusetts Gets the Final Word After Explosive Supreme Court Decision
A month ago, the Supreme Court struck down the 2007 Massachusetts Buffer Zone law as unconstitutional, leaving millions seething at the utter stupidity of our judicial system. Yesterday, Governor Deval Patrick signed a new bill, An Act to Promote Public Safety and Protect Access to Reproductive Health Care Facilities, to take the place of the former Buffer Zone law. While the new bill doesn’t create a buffer zone, new steps are taken within it to ensure the safety of visitors to Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health centers.
A quick synopsis of the Buffer Zone Law- It prevented protestors from coming within 35 feet of the entrances to Planned Parenthood health centers. It was inspired by a culmination of factors, including years of harassment of patients by anti-choice protesters, and the deaths of Shannon Lowney, 25 and Leanne Nichols, 38, staff members of a Planned Parenthood clinic shot and killed in 1994. Makes you think some space between the clinics and the crazies is necessary, but apparently, our Supreme Court justices are too holed up deep in their own buffer zones to understand the public safety issue.
Kate Ziegler, a local Bostonian, sought reproductive healthcare at the Boston Planned Parenthood in 2008. In an interview I conducted with her today she said, “In 2008, I was heading to Planned Parenthood to get birth control pills. I was approached by a man who asked me why I was going into the clinic. When I said that I didn’t intend to answer him, and that it wasn’t his business, he called me a “Nazi bitch,” and told me that I should be ashamed of myself. I was really glad the buffer zone existed. it was a startling experience. A few weeks later, I spent time unlocking my bike by the clinic. Luckily no one said anything, but the anxiety of someone potentially deciding to pursue you as you leave Planned Parenthood is a real concern. It was traumatic, and made me think of the errand of picking up my birth control every month, and worrying about being followed upon leaving the clinic.” Ms. Ziegler testified earlier this month in support of the Safe Access Bill.
“Women shouldn’t have to run a gantlet of screaming, terrorizing, and bullying in order to get legal health care services, and this new law will help ensure that they don’t,” said Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Last month’s Supreme Court ruling put women at risk. Barely a month later, Massachusetts is righting the wrong that the Supreme Court’s dangerous and misguided decision created.”
Planned Parenthood’s release states, “The new law passed today can serve as a template for how other jurisdictions can protect patients while complying with the Supreme Court ruling. The law enhances several existing protections and creates new ones, while complying with the legal standards outlined by the Supreme Court.” It cites new penalties for blocking women’s access to health care centers and give law enforcement increase authority to arrest or withdraw protesters who are blocking access.
Immediately after the Supreme Court’s June 26, 2014 ruling, sidewalks outside of women’s health centers in Massachusetts were crowded with protestors – as they had been before the 2007 law passed. Some differences between the two laws include – withdrawal orders, allowing law enforcement to order individuals or groups away from a facility entrance or driveway. In some ways, the Massachusetts law is better than the Buffer Zone, in that it allows any violation of a new provision to result in arrests or criminal charges. A semi-buffer zone is created if an individual receives a written order where they must remain 25 feet from a Planned Parenthood entrance. The law also prohibits the use of threats or intimidation as patients access or depart the facility. If a patient is harassed, they can then seek injunctive relief, damages, and attorney fees from their harasser.
The Safe Access bill took effect immediately upon Governor Patrick’s signature yesterday afternoon.
In a national press conference, Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts President Marty Walz described the aftermath of the June 25 court decision, “In Boston on the Saturday after the law was struck down, a large group of protesters yelled at our patients and literally chased some of them down the sidewalk of our health center. One of our patients was so upset by her experience that she left without the medical care she needed. Another patient tried to get out of her car on the passenger side. A protester blocked her. A volunteer escort helped her out and shielded her as she moved into the health center.”
It’s ironic that the Supreme Court thinks that these protesters are providing gentle “guidance and counsel,” when they’re acting like rabid dogs.
Ordinances effected by the June 25 decision include some in New Hampshire, Portland, Maine, and Burlington, Vermont. In Burlington, the city council unanimously voted to find “legally defensible alternatives” to the former 35 foot buffer zone.
Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the defendent of McCullen v. Coakley on behalf of the state, said, “Women have the constitutional right to reproductive healthcare. We used the courts own ruling to map our own legislation. We think this will stand constitutional challenge. We’ve been disappointed in the courts ruling, we’re proud in Mass. that the court didn’t have the final word. We’re happy to work with any Planned Parenthood and any cities that may need our help in ensuring women’s safe access to reproductive health.”
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Sarah Betancourt
Sarah Betancourt is a Boston-based journalist who has written for In These Times, Open Media Boston, Spare Change News, Boston.com, the Boston Globe Environment Blog, and has had work appear in video on the National Geographic Water Currents Blog. She writes primarily about Boston politics, labor, Generation Y issues, and environmental policy.
86 responses to Massachusetts Gets the Final Word After Explosive Supreme Court Decision
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
mea_mark July 31st, 2014 at 21:29
Sounds like something good came out of the horrible SCOTUS decision. I hope it gets picked up across America in a hurry.
mea_mark July 31st, 2014 at 21:29
Sounds like something good came out of the horrible SCOTUS decision. I hope it gets picked up across America in a hurry.
Steph July 31st, 2014 at 21:40
I would be SO tempted to “gently counter-counsel” protesters with an application of pepper spray.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 22:23
I think that a taser would keep them safely away from the women who are entering the clinics.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 23:58
I make my own, because I’ve sprayed myself with the manufactured stuff and I wouldn’t stake my life on it.
Given how easy it is to produce in quantity, it wouldn’t be hard to make pepper spray balloons.
Rusty Shackleford August 1st, 2014 at 00:11
Boy howdy have I got the product for you!
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 00:51
Bwahahahahaha
RAWR!
Robert Johnston August 1st, 2014 at 10:18
And if THAT don’t “get the message across,” usually a well-timed kick to the solar plexus (or the crotch) works wonders to help them “elevate their thinking.”
–RKJ
Steph July 31st, 2014 at 21:40
I would be SO tempted to “gently counter-counsel” protesters with an application of pepper spray.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 22:23
I think that a taser would keep them safely away from the women who are entering the clinics.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 23:58
I make my own, because I’ve sprayed myself with the manufactured stuff and I wouldn’t stake my life on it.
Given how easy it is to produce in quantity, it wouldn’t be hard to make pepper spray balloons.
Rusty Shackleford August 1st, 2014 at 00:11
Boy howdy have I got the product for you!
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 00:51
Bwahahahahaha
RAWR!
Robert Keith Johnston August 1st, 2014 at 10:18
And if THAT don’t “get the message across,” usually a well-timed kick to the solar plexus (or the crotch) works wonders to help them “elevate their thinking.”
–RKJ
Obewon July 31st, 2014 at 21:47
Even the Pope derides these crazy ‘ideological Christians’ as a ‘serious illness’ within the Church: “And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought… http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/21/pope-francis-describes-ideological-christians-as-a-serious-illness-within-the-church/
Obewon July 31st, 2014 at 21:47
Even the Pope derides these crazies. ‘Ideological Christians’ as a ‘serious illness’ within the Church: “And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought… http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/21/pope-francis-describes-ideological-christians-as-a-serious-illness-within-the-church/ Planned Parenthood provides life saving prenatal and other health care to millions of the 98% of women who use birth control. Many women use contraceptives for better health care, not for birth control.
arc99 July 31st, 2014 at 21:57
A step in the right direction. How about a “stand your ground” law for anyone who feels that their access to a medical clinic is being impeded. As Steph suggests, anyone who feels threatened, has every right to pepper spray or use other non lethal force against the person yelling at them.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 22:25
Given that the protest movement has no qualms about murdering clinic doctors, lethal force in anticipation of their use of violence might be a satisfactory way to keep them safely off the premises.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:49
I agree. Totally. Everyone should carry pepper spray and if you feel you are in danger, USE IT. Liberally of course.
arc99 July 31st, 2014 at 21:57
A step in the right direction. How about a “stand your ground” law for anyone who feels that their access to a medical clinic is being impeded. As Steph suggests, anyone who feels threatened, has every right to pepper spray or use other non lethal force against the person yelling at them.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 22:25
Given that the protest movement has no qualms about murdering clinic doctors, lethal force in anticipation of their use of violence might be a satisfactory way to keep them safely off the premises.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:49
I agree. Totally. Everyone should carry pepper spray and if you feel you are in danger, USE IT. Liberally of course.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 22:46
Who needs buffer zones when clinics can keep large, mean man-hating dogs. Just put them on runners outside the clinic. Done and done.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 23:38
I object to the man eating part. How about training them to go after people with crosses and signs?
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 23:50
You object to the man eating part, I object to the whole men denying women their bodily autonomy part.
*shrug*
Most men do not need oral contraceptives, abortions or Plan-B.
Release the hounds.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 23:52
You don’t lump me in with religious bigots and I’ll keep supporting women who need it.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 23:55
First, if your support of women is predicated on you liking me, well, I have two words for you and you’re going to like me even less when I say them.
Second, you don’t need access to those clinics.
And finally, nothing in my comment had to do with religious bigots. It had to do with men who’d deny women their bodily autonomy.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 23:58
And, I’m not one of them. It’s religious bigots who are campaigning to deny women their rights to healthcare of all types.
While I don’t need access to those clinics but women I know do, and women I have known have used those services and I fully support them in that continued access.
So learn to discriminate friend from foe even in a simple exchanges like this.
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 00:00
If you don’t need access to those clinics then you have nothing to fear from the aforementioned dogs, QED.
> You don’t lump me in with religious bigots and I’ll keep supporting women who need it.
Men that only conditionally support women are not any sort of friend I need, thanks.
tiredoftea August 1st, 2014 at 00:05
I unconditionally support women, it’s simplistic bromides I dislike. And, another woman may need my support to help her to safely go to a clinic, so your solution isn’t one.
To complete this, I first offered my comment in jest, so feel free to throttle back.
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 00:05
*yawn*
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:48
It’s cool tea / we know you and know what you stand for!!!!
tiredoftea August 1st, 2014 at 20:28
Thanks! I get that it’s a more difficult topic for some than others.
R.J. Carter August 1st, 2014 at 13:46
Ain’t she a charmer?
tiredoftea August 1st, 2014 at 20:29
Yeah, it’s a tough subject for some and my sparkling and refreshing sense of humor can sometimes miss its mark.
R.J. Carter August 2nd, 2014 at 12:29
Especially when the target aggressively insists on being missed.
danah gaz August 2nd, 2014 at 11:18
Sorry (not sorry) I am not submissive enough for your tastes.
donschneider August 2nd, 2014 at 11:05
No,Danah, it APPEARED to do with men in general. Throw rocks at your allies if you must, but realize that puts you in the same camp as the christian fanatic troglodytes blocking PP entrances !
danah gaz August 2nd, 2014 at 11:15
Yeah actually it doesn’t, but thanks for playing.
Not entertaining your “what about teh menz?!” nonsense today. Find a hobby.
William August 1st, 2014 at 01:02
Ahem
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 01:07
This is exactly true.
M D Reese August 1st, 2014 at 01:34
Yup–back in the day the bumper sticker read:
“If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament”.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:47
You’re right, most men are too busy going to pharmacies and getting their Cialis and Viagra without being harrassed.
Robert Johnston August 1st, 2014 at 10:14
…among other things! :-)
–RKJ
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 22:46
Who needs buffer zones when clinics can keep large, mean man-hating dogs. Just put them on runners outside the clinic. Done and done.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 23:38
I object to the man eating part. How about training them to go after people with crosses and signs?
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 23:50
You object to the man eating part, I object to the whole men denying women their bodily autonomy part.
*shrug*
Most men do not need oral contraceptives, abortions or Plan-B.
Release the hounds.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 23:52
You don’t lump me in with religious bigots and I’ll keep supporting women who need it.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 23:55
First, if your support of women is predicated on you liking me, well, I have two words for you and you’re going to like me even less when I say them.
Second, you don’t need access to those clinics.
And finally, nothing in my comment had to do with religious bigots. It had to do with men who’d deny women their bodily autonomy.
tiredoftea July 31st, 2014 at 23:58
And, I’m not one of them. It’s religious bigots who are campaigning to deny women their rights to healthcare of all types.
While I don’t need access to those clinics but women I know do, and women I have known have used those services and I fully support them in that continued access.
So learn to discriminate friend from foe even in a simple exchanges like this.
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 00:00
If you don’t need access to those clinics then you have nothing to fear from the aforementioned dogs, QED.
> You don’t lump me in with religious bigots and I’ll keep supporting women who need it.
Men that only conditionally support women are not any sort of friend I need, thanks.
tiredoftea August 1st, 2014 at 00:05
I unconditionally support women, it’s simplistic bromides I dislike. And, another woman may need my support to help her to safely go to a clinic, so your solution isn’t one.
To complete this, I first offered my comment in jest, so feel free to throttle back.
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 00:05
*yawn*
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:48
It’s cool tea / we know you and know what you stand for!!!!
tiredoftea August 1st, 2014 at 20:28
Thanks! I get that it’s a more difficult topic for some than others.
R.J. Carter August 1st, 2014 at 13:46
Ain’t she a charmer?
tiredoftea August 1st, 2014 at 20:29
Yeah, it’s a tough subject for some and my sparkling and refreshing sense of humor can sometimes miss its mark.
R.J. Carter August 2nd, 2014 at 12:29
Especially when the target aggressively insists on being missed.
danah gaz August 2nd, 2014 at 11:18
Sorry (not sorry) I am not submissive enough for your tastes.
donschneider August 2nd, 2014 at 11:05
No,Danah, it APPEARED to do with men in general. Throw rocks at your allies if you must, but realize that puts you in the same camp as the christian fanatic troglodytes blocking PP entrances !
danah gaz August 2nd, 2014 at 11:15
Yeah actually it doesn’t, but thanks for playing.
Not entertaining your “what about teh menz?!” nonsense today. Find a hobby.
William August 1st, 2014 at 01:02
Ahem
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 01:07
This is exactly true.
M D Reese August 1st, 2014 at 01:34
Yup–back in the day the bumper sticker read:
“If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament”.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:47
You’re right, most men are too busy going to pharmacies and getting their Cialis and Viagra without being harrassed.
Robert Keith Johnston August 1st, 2014 at 10:14
…among other things! :-)
–RKJ
William August 1st, 2014 at 01:05
Electric fences?
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 01:06
I still vote for dogs.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:46
I think women should carry personal tasers .. and use them when they feel threatened. Also .. too … earplugs.
bming5 August 1st, 2014 at 13:45
AK-47s? Sorry, the insanity is thick, thick…
William August 1st, 2014 at 01:05
Electric fences?
danah gaz August 1st, 2014 at 01:06
I still vote for dogs.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:46
I think women should carry personal tasers .. and use them when they feel threatened. Also .. too … earplugs.
bming5 August 1st, 2014 at 13:45
AK-47s? Sorry, the insanity is thick, thick…
M D Reese August 1st, 2014 at 01:39
I hope more states follow suit. Why is it considered OK to harass your fellow citizens as long as they are women trying to access healthcare? In my opinion the full range of women’s health care needs should be offered discreetly and without harassment at every hospital and medical clinic that accepts public funding.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:46
Because five angry old white Catholic men said so.
M D Reese August 1st, 2014 at 01:39
I hope more states follow suit. Why is it considered OK to harass your fellow citizens as long as they are women trying to access healthcare? In my opinion the full range of women’s health care needs should be offered discreetly and without harassment at every hospital and medical clinic that accepts public funding.
BanditBasheert August 1st, 2014 at 12:46
Because five angry old white Catholic men said so.
fantagor August 1st, 2014 at 03:17
I encourage every woman entering PP to record the journey into and out of the clinic. Point it at any protesting zealots and remind them that any threats are being recorded and the video is admissible as evidence against them in a criminal or civil proceeding. Better yet, since the protestors are in the street, record them without their knowledge so we can get a glimpse at the true face of evil.
M A G August 1st, 2014 at 07:01
Right, I do t believe you have to inform someone they’re being recorded if it’s in a public space. Lack of privacy is implied in public, right? Good idea to record both going in and out.
fantagor August 1st, 2014 at 03:17
I encourage every woman entering PP to record the journey into and out of the clinic. Point it at any protesting zealots and remind them that any threats are being recorded and the video is admissible as evidence against them in a criminal or civil proceeding. Better yet, since the protestors are in the street, record them without their knowledge so we can get a glimpse at the true face of evil.
MIAtheistGal August 1st, 2014 at 07:01
Right, I do t believe you have to inform someone they’re being recorded if it’s in a public space. Lack of privacy is implied in public, right? Good idea to record both going in and out.
OldLefty August 1st, 2014 at 06:49
It will be interesting to see if they take the case of someone who is challenging THEIR buffer zones;
A challenge to the Supreme Court’s own buffer zone could come before the high court soon. Jeffrey Light, a Washington-based attorney, is set to argue the Supreme Court’s buffer zone is unconstitutional in front of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in September. The next step would be the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s rule was challenged by Harold Hodge Jr., a student from Maryland who was arrested in 2011 while mounting a protest to criticize police treatment of blacks and hispanics. The court has said the rule could not apply to public sidewalks outside the court but could apply to the plaza, a key distinction between the Massachusetts and Supreme Court legal disputes.
“To the extent that the Supreme Court’s plaza is analogous to a sidewalk, it is hypocritical to ban First Amendment activity there while striking down a ban on First Amendment activity on the sidewalk in front of a clinic. First Amendment activity should be permitted in both places,” Light told Business Insider in an interview.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-abortion-buffer-zones-decision-2014-6#ixzz398SMHVeR
SCOTUS protestors simply want to offer gentle counseling to the justices, (to whom they pay a salary).
Plus, we need more challenges to the free speech pens restricting speech around political conventions.
As Dahlia Lithwick said, “Privileging “gentle counseling” for some isn’t quite the same as promoting free speech for all.”.
OldLefty August 1st, 2014 at 06:49
It will be interesting to see if they take the case of someone who is challenging THEIR buffer zones;
A challenge to the Supreme Court’s own buffer zone could come before the high court soon. Jeffrey Light, a Washington-based attorney, is set to argue the Supreme Court’s buffer zone is unconstitutional in front of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in September. The next step would be the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s rule was challenged by Harold Hodge Jr., a student from Maryland who was arrested in 2011 while mounting a protest to criticize police treatment of blacks and hispanics. The court has said the rule could not apply to public sidewalks outside the court but could apply to the plaza, a key distinction between the Massachusetts and Supreme Court legal disputes.
“To the extent that the Supreme Court’s plaza is analogous to a sidewalk, it is hypocritical to ban First Amendment activity there while striking down a ban on First Amendment activity on the sidewalk in front of a clinic. First Amendment activity should be permitted in both places,” Light told Business Insider in an interview.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-abortion-buffer-zones-decision-2014-6#ixzz398SMHVeR
SCOTUS protestors simply want to offer gentle counseling to the justices, (to whom they pay a salary).
Plus, we need more challenges to the free speech pens restricting speech around political conventions.
As Dahlia Lithwick said, “Privileging “gentle counseling” for some isn’t quite the same as promoting free speech for all.”.
donschneider August 2nd, 2014 at 10:54
I keep my fingers crossed for “divine intervention” among the male justices of the supreme court
donschneider August 2nd, 2014 at 10:54
I keep my fingers crossed for “divine intervention” among the male justices of the supreme court. Hopefully it will involve an asteroid falling on them while within their own “sacred buffer zone” !