MCFL on Buffer Zone Ruling

The Massachusetts Citizens for Life has released the following statement on the unanimous Supreme Court decision striking down the Masaschusetts buffer zone legislation:

Massachusetts Citizens for Life welcomes the Supreme Court unanimous decision, McCullen v. Coakley, which strikes down the Massachusetts so-called Buffer Zone as a violation of the First Amendment.

The court reiterates tradition in this country that the sidewalk is the vehicle for free speech.  There are already laws on the books which prohibit blocking entrances, harassing people, etc.

​The McCullen decision makes it clear that more restrictive laws may be written only if the current laws are not working – something that the state of Massachusetts failed to prove.

“This is a victory for all citizens who value their First Amendment rights and for clinic-bound women who might need someone to talk to,” says Anne Fox, President.

Mark Rienzi, the lead counsel said, “Americans have the freedom to talk to whomever they please on public sidewalks. That includes peaceful pro-lifers like Eleanor McCullen, who just wants to offer information and help to women who would like it. The Supreme Court has affirmed a critical freedom that has been an essential part of American life since the nation’s founding.”

About Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno

  • what the protest was about…who they were protesting…this is EXACTLY what I’ve said ever since the unConstitutional buffer zones were implemented.

    You CANNOT disallow people from walking on a public sidewalk in front of ANY location…so long as they are not blocking access.

    Period…

  • Another bad day for crash-n-burn Coakley.  She and POTUS must be in a competition for Biggest Loser, SCOTUS Edition.

  • http://bostinno.streetwise.co/

    “Charlie hopes the current law is upheld,” a Baker spokesperson told BostInno. Though vague in nature, the statement could be taken in a manner that Baker is, in fact, pro choice, or that he’s simply a proponent of laws enacted at the state level. Either way, his show of support for the cause, however broad in his choice of words, a positive direction for bipartisan collaboration in customarily blue Massachusetts.

    Now that the Court has decided I hope Baker will change his position to support the 1st Amendment.  He’s already wobbly on the 2nd, can he really afford to go against more rights? Be a follower on this issue Charlie, a follower of the Constitution.  Don’t go along with the Dems who are right now thinking up ways to make an end run around the 1st Amendment.

  • angeljulie3

    Your post is amazing, Glad to read it.

    Drive Jacket Replica