Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

December-20-02

Supreme Court Asks for Bush Opinion in Anti-Abortion Violence Case

In a somewhat unusual move, the US Supreme Court asked the Bush administration’s Solicitor-General for his opinion on a case involving anti-abortion extremists who circulated “WANTED” posters for abortion providers and launched a Web site called the “Nuremberg Files” that lists abortion providers’ personal information and declares them guilty of crimes against humanity. Doctors who were murdered had lines through them crossing them off, and three doctors listed on the posters were killed in the 1990s.

The administration’s opinion could determine whether or not the Supreme Court agrees to hear an appeal from the extremists who claim their actions are protected under free speech provisions in the Constitution, according to Bloomberg News Service.
The case, American Coalition of Life Activists vs. Planned Parenthood, was appealed to the Supreme Court after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the extremists were liable for threats under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE) and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and awarded plaintiffs a $110 million judgment. “Violence is not a protected value. Nor is a true threat of violence with intent to intimidate,” the court ruled in May according to Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report.

It will most likely take Solicitor General Theodore Olson, the Bush administration’s Supreme Court lawyer, several months to respond to the justices’ request – which means the case will remain inactive on the court’s docket for the remainder of the court’s term, according to the Boston Globe.

The National Clinic Access Project of the Feminist Majority Foundation led a group of 13 reproductive rights organizations that filed an amicus brief in the case. “These posters and the website are threats, which are not protected by the First Amendment,” FMF President Eleanor Smeal stated. We hope that anti-abortion extremists will learn that the violence and fear they preach will not be tolerated.”

Media Resources: Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report 12/17/02; Associated Press 12/16/02; Bloomberg News 12/16/02; Feminist Daily News Wire


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

9/12/2014 Violence Against Women Act Turns 20 - Saturday will be the 20th Anniversary of the groundbreaking federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Passed in 1994, VAWA was the first piece of federal legislation to specifically address domestic violence and sexual assault as crimes and to provide federal funding to improve local response to violence against women, including training and resources for law enforcement and judges. President Barack Obama on Tuesday issued a proclamation commemorating the VAWA anniversary. . . .
 
9/12/2014 Indiana Woman Charged With Feticide For Premature Delivery - An Indiana woman has been charged with feticide after she delivered prematurely and sought hospital treatment. Purvi Patel, 33, sought help at an emergency room for vaginal bleeding where it was discovered that she had delivered prematurely at home. . . .
 
9/11/2014 Missouri Legislators Pass 72-Hour Abortion Waiting Period Law - Missouri legislators voted late last night to triple the state's current 24-hour waiting period to 72 hours, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Governor Jay Nixon previously vetoed the bill in July, calling it "extreme and disrespectful." Missouri's House voted 117-44 to override the veto, and then the Senate used a procedural move to stop a Democratic filibuster of the bill and vote 23-7 to complete the veto override Wednesday. "The only purpose of a 72-hour waiting period is to attempt to punish, shame, and demean women who have arrived at a personal decision that politicians happen to disagree with," said the president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. . . .