The Supreme Court heard arguments this week on a closely watched case involving the way pro-life activists demonstrate their objection to abortion.
The debate focussed upon whether abortion clinics can sue pro-life protestors who have used dramatic and sometimes violent tactics to try to close the clinics.
Several mainstream Jewish groups, who have long supported a woman’s right to choose, filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of the abortion clinics.
“We want to do whatever we can to thwart those who wish to deny women their constitutional right to abortion,” said Samuel Rabinove, legal director of the American Jewish Committee.
AJCommittee joined in a brief filed by the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund. Also joining the brief were B’nai B’rith Women, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, and the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism.
The case centered on the actions of an anti-abortion group called the Pro-Life Action Network that allegedly tried to close abortion clinics using methods that included bombings and arson, physical and verbal intimidation of clinic personnel and patients, break-ins and blockades.
“They will use any and all means necessary” to close abortion clinics, argued Fay Clayton, attorney for NOW and the clinics.
“We don’t want in any way to infringe on their First Amendment rights” to freedom of speech and association, Clayton continued, “but the use of force, violence, and fear crosses the line.”
The key issue is whether abortion clinics can use a federal anti-racketeering law to prohibit such anti-abortion activity.
The law, called the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, is an attractive legal option for clinics because it could allow protection of clinics nationwide and provide winning parties with triple money damages.
RICO, which was originally drafted to thwart organized crime activity, makes it illegal to conduct an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.
Clayton argued on behalf of the clinics that Congress’ intent when it passed RICO in 1970 was to include activity driven by motivations other than economic gain.
Both houses of Congress this past term have passed similar versions of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances act, which would provide both civil and criminal penalties for blocking abortion clinic entrances and exits, said Wendy Lecker, assistant legal director of AJCommittee.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
