The New York Times has reported that the Nuremberg Files Web site gained a new online home this Saturday. The site's new host was not named, but is based in the United States. Several national and international sites also include Nuremberg materials through the use of links or "mirroring."
A federal jury ruled early this month that the Nuremberg site violated the Freedom of Access to Clinics Act (FACE) and federal racketeering statutes and ordered Nuremberg creators to pay $107 million in damages. Passed in 1994, FACE made it a felony offense to blockade or commit violence against women's health care clinics and workers. The Nuremberg trial marked the first time that FACE charges were brought against individuals making threats of violence, rather than engaging in actual physical confrontations.
Although the judge did not order Nuremberg creators to destroy the site, The Nuremberg Files site was temporarily pulled just days after the ruling. Internet service provider Mindspring had pulled the plug, saying that the site violated the company's "acceptable use" policies.
Planned Parenthood Director of litigation Roger K. Evans said that future lawsuits against Nuremberg Files publishers are likely. "There is nothing to prevent hundreds of potential plaintiffs from suing," he said.
However, publishers living outside the U.S. are not vulnerable to such lawsuits. Journalist Karin Spaink of Amsterdam is one such example. Spaink, who belongs to contrast.org, a group that publishes controversial and/or banned Web pages, copied a large portion of the Nuremberg materials last December and published them online Monday.
Spaink has stated that she is pro-choice, but believes that the Nuremberg site does not include direct threats of violence and therefore should be protected speech. Spaink warns Web readers that she may have altered information found on the site "Do not trust the names and addresses you find here, and do not use violence against the people listed here. You may end up shooting your own affiliates," she warns.
Past Stories: Mindspring Pulls Nuremberg Site
Federal Jury Finds "Un-wanted" Posters And "Nuremberg Files" To Be Threats, Not Free Speech
Jury: Web Site in Violation of FACE
Media Resources: New York Times - February 22, 1999
10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1.
The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case.
UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
10/30/2014 North Dakota Medical Students Speak Out Against Measure 1 - Medical students at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences are asking North Dakotans to vote no on Measure 1, a personhood measure on the state ballot this fall.
The students issued published a letter in the Grand Forks Herald stating that they opposed Measure 1 in part because they are against "the government's taking control of the personal health care decisions of its citizens." Nearly 60 UND School of Medicine students signed the letter, citing concerns over the "very broad and ambiguous language" used in the proposed amendment, which has no regard for serious and life-threatening medical situations such as ectopic pregnancies.
Measure 1 would change the North Dakota state constitution to create an "inalienable right to life" for humans "at any stage of development" - including the moment of fertilization and conception. . . .