# Abortion clinic "Buffer zones" in Massachusetts not legal, says unanimous SCOTUS **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 26, 2014, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698 "2014-06-26T14:58:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/201 "2014-06-26T23:20:36Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Not if more don’t. Are you now, by the way, claiming that you think clinic protests are effective? Or is this a hypothetical? Hypothetical. I’m not invested in the clinic protests one way or the other, since I don’t participate in them. I am however entirely uninterested in abortion-seekers having special freedom from protests that other groups (except polticians, I guess) don’t have. If it’s legal to throw disruptive protests inside a church, it should be legal to have disruptive protests outside an abortion clinic. Abortion is already far too easy and guilt-free a procedure. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/202 "2014-06-26T23:21:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, I don’t agree that should be the law. So you’re in favor of inequality between men and women? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/203 "2014-06-26T23:25:05Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Hypothetical. > > I’m not invested in the clinic protests one way or the other, since I don’t participate in them. I am however entirely uninterested in abortion-seekers having special freedom from protests that other groups (except polticians, I guess) don’t have. If it’s legal to throw disruptive protests inside a church, it should be legal to have disruptive protests outside an abortion clinic. Abortion is already far too easy and guilt-free a procedure. Is it legal to throw disruptive protests inside a church? I confess I’m hardly a legal scholar, let alone an American legal scholar. I would have thought a call to the police would end in such a disruptive person removed. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/204 "2014-06-26T23:29:44Z")
> [@Shakes](#): > > So you’re in favor of inequality between men and women? This is still a terrible argument. Unless **Bricker** is against considering a woman’s body her “sovereign territory” but for a man’s body counting as his, you can’t phrase his disagreement as a gender inequality issue. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/205 "2014-06-26T23:31:37Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > If it’s legal to throw disruptive protests inside a church… Is it? Where in this country is this legal? ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/206 "2014-06-26T23:37:05Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Abortion is already far too easy and guilt-free a procedure. So your aim is to make millions of women feel guilty about abortions? And you expect us to enshrine this sanctimonious and condescending aim into law why exactly . . . ? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/207 "2014-06-26T23:39:22Z")
Bricker, I am curious of your opinion on free speech zones and this ruling. I notice you have been sidestepping this issue, but i would really like to have your opinion. In United States v. Grace (1983) the court ruled that protesting on the grounds of the supreme court is not protected by the first amendment because > [@](#): > > [t]he Court grounds are not transformed into ‘public forum’ property merely because the public is permitted to freely enter and leave the grounds at practically all times and is admitted to the building during specified hours. OK. But somehow the parking lot and sidewalk in front of a abortion clinic is a public forum. Why, constitutionally, is there a difference? I would also like your opinion on free speech zones and Presidential visits. I know that the rationale is security, but if I am willing to be searched and even shackled, do my free speech rights let me get closer than 35 feet to the president? Is there a constitutional buffer in this case and why is it different, or is it different, with women wanting to get an abortion? ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/208 "2014-06-26T23:39:47Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > This is still a terrible argument. Unless **Bricker** is against considering a woman’s body her “sovereign territory” but for a man’s body counting as his, you can’t phrase his disagreement as a gender inequality issue. But still, men have complete domain over their own bodies and women do not. That, at it’s very core, makes them unequal. The fact that they are biologically different does not preclude the woman from equal rights protection. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/209 "2014-06-26T23:48:56Z")
> [@Shakes](#): > > But still, men have complete domain over their own bodies and women do not. That, at it’s very core, makes them unequal. > > The fact that they are biologically different does not preclude the woman from equal rights protection. I quite agree. So we’ll just say that neither have that sovereignty, and thereby treat both equally. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/210 "2014-06-26T23:51:31Z")
> [@Shakes](#): > > So you’re in favor of inequality between men and women? I don’t agree the law should treat either men’s or women’s bodies as sovereign entities. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2014, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/211 "2014-06-26T23:53:15Z")
> [@Shakes](#): > > But still, men have complete domain over their own bodies and women do not. That, at it’s very core, makes them unequal. That’s factually incorrect. A court can order a anal cavity search, a DNA test, or blood to be drawn, or even surgery to be performed on a man’s body. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/212 "2014-06-27T00:01:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t agree the law should treat either men’s or women’s bodies as sovereign entities. Yup. The whole notion of your body being a ‘sovereign entity’ is pretty revolting. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/213 "2014-06-27T00:05:36Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Yup. > > The whole notion of your body being a ‘sovereign entity’ is pretty revolting. Revolting? ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/214 "2014-06-27T00:05:49Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > So you agree that it’s wrong to harass women for trying to enter certain buildings, and it’s a good and positive thing to do to provide support for women to enter certain buildings if someone is trying to harass/verbally obstruct them? The first part doesn’t imply the second. The woman seeking an abortion and the protester ‘harassing’ her (which, incidentally, I have zero reason to believe is particularly common) could both be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/215 "2014-06-27T00:07:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s factually incorrect. A court can order a anal cavity search, a DNA test, or blood to be drawn, or even surgery to be performed on a man’s body. _A court can order_, is a pretty big caveat. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/216 "2014-06-27T00:10:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s factually incorrect. A court can order a anal cavity search, a DNA test, or blood to be drawn, or even surgery to be performed on a man’s body. Yes, and both men and women are subjugated to that law. So they’re equal. Give me an example wherein a man is subjugated to a law but a woman is not. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/217 "2014-06-27T00:13:45Z")
> [@Darth\_Sensitive](#): > > Why are anti-trespassing laws not good enough to keep unwanted people off of the property of these clinics? They are good enough to keep them off of the property. This was about buffer zones applying to public sidewalks. Many clinics are in urban areas where they don’t have much in the way of property outside of the building. It’s not ideal, but it’s hard to find locations that are near people who need the clinic’s services, have ample property to allow for discreet arrivals and departures, and where the landlord doesn’t balk at the proposed use (either because they’re anti-choice themselves or because they don’t want [protests at their child’s school](http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/anti-abortion-protesters-target-clinics-landlord-outside-childs-md-school/2011/09/12/gIQAn8z2NK_story.html)). ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/218 "2014-06-27T00:16:38Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Is it legal to throw disruptive protests inside a church? I confess I’m hardly a legal scholar, let alone an American legal scholar. I would have thought a call to the police would end in such a disruptive person removed. Many American cultural liberals think it should be. See the case in Russia with that feminist punk rock band. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/219 "2014-06-27T00:18:22Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > …and the protester ‘harassing’ her (which, incidentally, I have zero reason to believe is particularly common)… Because your ignorance is your evidence? BTW, where is it legal in this country to throw disruptive protests inside a church? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698/220 "2014-06-27T00:18:24Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Many American cultural liberals think it should be. See the case in Russia with that feminist punk rock band. How about dealing with the arguments that are actually being made, instead of _some shit you heard on the teevee_? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-in-massachusetts-not-legal-says-unanimous-scotus/691698.md?page=12)