The Buffer Zone

T

Timshel

New member
I think the Supreme Courts own buffer zone can not be justified if this one cannot. How is it okay to limit the speech around a political unit but not for an organization providing healthcare?


The Republicans will likely ignore their deference to State's rights on this one, again, and also their support for such buffers around funerals and polling places. According to them you are not allowed to be black and stand near a polling place.


I fail to see how such a law creates a significant burden on speech and there is a rational state interest in protecting the peace and safety of individuals. 35 feet is not very far and one can easily project their voice over such a distance. Also, the buffer zone has nothing to do with content.

I think the conservatives will be hard pressed to carve out a principle that allows them to allow some buffer zones while denying this one. Justice the Hut does not really care about creating a working precedent when he pens his screeds. But that is usually always in dissent. His sore loser responses have done nothing to bolster his position, e.g., Windsor and Lawrence.


What are your thoughts?


http://www.npr.org/2013/12/20/25587...ders-legality-of-abortion-clinic-buffer-zones


The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in a case testing the constitutionality of buffer zones at abortion clinics.


Fourteen years ago, the court upheld Colorado's 8-foot "floating" buffer zones around individuals to protect patients and staff entering and exiting these clinics. Since then, buffer zones have prevented demonstrators from closely approaching patients and staff without permission.


But the issue is back before a different and more conservative Supreme Court.


The Massachusetts law prohibits anyone from standing within 35 feet of the entrance to a reproductive health care facility where abortions take place. That distance, the length of a school bus, takes the average person about seven seconds to walk. And, according to the law, anyone can walk through it — as long as their purpose is to enter the facility or cross to the other side of the zone.
 
I also fail to see how it imposes a burden on freedom of speech. We limit access to people from various things all of the time. I love auto racing. We restrict people from various portions of the track for safety. Women should at times have the right to choose to end a pregnancy. We have a right to privacy and dignity on the part of the woman, and an abortion clinic is a legitimate business that should be allowed access to public sidewalks, public roads, and public utilities just like any other business.

How the court will interpret this is anyone's guess.
 
I believe they will uphold it 5-4. There will be hell to pay if they don't. I don't know if anyone here has ever had to walk through these bastards to get into a clinic, but it's traumatic, scary, intimidating, and meant to be. And of course, there is a history of violence in the anti-choice movement...up to and including murder.
 
Darla said:
I believe they will uphold it 5-4. There will be hell to pay if they don't. I don't know if anyone here has ever had to walk through these bastards to get into a clinic, but it's traumatic, scary, intimidating, and meant to be. And of course, there is a history of violence in the anti-choice movement...up to and including murder.
Click to expand...

I have to admit I felt none of those emotions. I have been through the crowd even back in the day when there was no buffer zone. I loved it every time. My blood shot up through the roof even before I got out of the car. I know what it means when they say "she got her Irish up". One of the times I told an old lady (i was about 25 she was about 60) that I would smash her fucking face right in for her if she didn't move her ass right out of my path immediately...and that old bitch moved quick. Another time I told a man if it looked like he had ever been able to get laid in his life he might have found something else to do that morning.

However...unlike most of the arrogant male morons on this board, I actually fully understand, and always have, that many women are not like me. And that most especially in this most sacred (to me) of places, the MEDICAL HEALTH clinic treating the under-served, the poor, the very young, the traumatized, etc, woman, her safety must rule supreme. I can't be at every damned clinic in the country escorting.
 
1966stang said:
I also fail to see how it imposes a burden on freedom of speech. We limit access to people from various things all of the time. I love auto racing. We restrict people from various portions of the track for safety. Women should at times have the right to choose to end a pregnancy. We have a right to privacy and dignity on the part of the woman, and an abortion clinic is a legitimate business that should be allowed access to public sidewalks, public roads, and public utilities just like any other business.

How the court will interpret this is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...

Well, those portions of the race track are private property or strictly controlled by a public authority as if they were private property. I don't think that really translates very well. For instance, access to the Supreme Court's Plaza is not tightly controlled and, worse, the limits on demonstration there do not serve the purpose of allowing those with business safe access. But I think limits on demonstrations within the Court, as would limits into various areas of a race track, are easily justified simply because access is routinely restricted. Here, we are talking about public areas, like sidewalks.
 
I'd be shocked if it wasn't upheld at least 6-3 as a legitimate time, place or manner restriction. Even with this Court.
 
Last edited:
How they rule will probably come down to Roberts, unless Kennedy reconsiders. I almost want to hear how they would justify it if they strike it down. If Justice the Hut expects to be taken seriously, he should lay out how his opinion would work if in the majority. But he is just a crank and they don't do workable alternatives.
 
Edit my earlier post because it was unclear. I think it's upheld at least 6-3. Scalia, Thomas and Alito will almost surely vote to strike it down. Kennedy likely sides with the more left-leaning justices. It will be hard for Roberts to justify overturning it, so I think he sides with the majority and crafts the opinion himself.
 
aeprga said:
Edit my earlier post because it was unclear. I think it's upheld at least 6-3. Scalia, Thomas and Alito will almost surely vote to strike it down. Kennedy likely sides with the more left-leaning justices. It will be hard for Roberts to justify overturning it, so I think he sides with the majority and crafts the opinion himself.
Click to expand...

Kennedy sided with Thomas and Scalia last time. He is very protective of speech.
 
Darla said:
I have to admit I felt none of those emotions. I have been through the crowd even back in the day when there was no buffer zone. I loved it every time. My blood shot up through the roof even before I got out of the car. I know what it means when they say "she got her Irish up". One of the times I told an old lady (i was about 25 she was about 60) that I would smash her fucking face right in for her if she didn't move her ass right out of my path immediately...and that old bitch moved quick. Another time I told a man if it looked like he had ever been able to get laid in his life he might have found something else to do that morning.

However...unlike most of the arrogant male morons on this board, I actually fully understand, and always have, that many women are not like me. And that most especially in this most sacred (to me) of places, the MEDICAL HEALTH clinic treating the under-served, the poor, the very young, the traumatized, etc, woman, her safety must rule supreme. I can't be at every damned clinic in the country escorting.
Click to expand...

You're a martyr for a grand cause and your courage is admirable. I stand with all the lives you have saved and we applaud your work. God bless you.
 
Darla said:
I have to admit I felt none of those emotions. I have been through the crowd even back in the day when there was no buffer zone. I loved it every time. My blood shot up through the roof even before I got out of the car. I know what it means when they say "she got her Irish up". One of the times I told an old lady (i was about 25 she was about 60) that I would smash her fucking face right in for her if she didn't move her ass right out of my path immediately...and that old bitch moved quick. Another time I told a man if it looked like he had ever been able to get laid in his life he might have found something else to do that morning.

However...unlike most of the arrogant male morons on this board, I actually fully understand, and always have, that many women are not like me. And that most especially in this most sacred (to me) of places, the MEDICAL HEALTH clinic treating the under-served, the poor, the very young, the traumatized, etc, woman, her safety must rule supreme. I can't be at every damned clinic in the country escorting.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for your service. As the husband of a wife I adore, and the father of three daughters, I would want the same love and care shown to them were they to want access to a clinic. You have my respect!
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Well, those portions of the race track are private property or strictly controlled by a public authority as if they were private property. I don't think that really translates very well. For instance, access to the Supreme Court's Plaza is not tightly controlled and, worse, the limits on demonstration there do not serve the purpose of allowing those with business safe access. But I think limits on demonstrations within the Court, as would limits into various areas of a race track, are easily justified simply because access is routinely restricted. Here, we are talking about public areas, like sidewalks.
Click to expand...

Seems rational enough.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
How come none of the conservatives are willing to voice an opinion on this?
Click to expand...

Because of several factors

#1. They think God/Zeus/Thor/Allah or the deity of the moment will be behind their cause, and they will win regardless of what that silly evil liberal supreme court does.

#2. Many of them cannot name a sitting supreme court justice.

#3. You started the thread in a rational, thoughtful, and fact base manor and they know their usual tactic of yelling, dunce, cockroach, and baby killer will make them look like the utter morons they really are.
 
1966stang said:
I also fail to see how it imposes a burden on freedom of speech. We limit access to people from various things all of the time. I love auto racing. We restrict people from various portions of the track for safety. Women should at times have the right to choose to end a pregnancy. We have a right to privacy and dignity on the part of the woman, and an abortion clinic is a legitimate business that should be allowed access to public sidewalks, public roads, and public utilities just like any other business.

How the court will interpret this is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...

it's a slippery slope between that and "free speech zones" though.

It's the same thing with the WBC. There were laws being made that they had to be x amount of miles/feet from away from a cemetery. But what about all those small new england towns where the cemetery, and the church, and town hall are all near each other? People can't protest on the town common? It can create a problem.

I think in this individual case though, it doesn't seem that bad. A school bus length is really absolutely trivial. Basically it just means people can't block the door.
 
quit whining. this is the kind of shit you get to deal with (from both sides) when you hate freedom and want rights to be regulated by the government.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
quit whining. this is the kind of shit you get to deal with (from both sides) when you hate freedom and want rights to be regulated by the government.
Click to expand...

What?

The rights of an individual can be violated by people other than the state and the purpose of government is to secure those rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top