Proximity back as buffer zone falls

Face-to-face protest, resistance to it seen returning at clinics

BOSTON -- On the morning the Supreme Court struck down restrictions that had created a no-protest buffer zone near abortion clinics, Ray Neary, the sole anti-abortion protester outside the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts health center in Boston, stood on the other side of a yellow line drawn 35 feet from the building.

He said he did not want to act too hastily.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a 7-year-old Massachusetts law that had created the buffer zone around entrances to abortion clinics. Abortion opponents had challenged the law on the grounds that the First Amendment gave them the right to have conversations with women entering the clinics to tell them about alternatives to abortion.

Neary, who said he had been protesting at the Boston clinic for more than a decade, said he hoped the court decision would allow him to talk with potential patients and to share literature with them. The removal of the no-protest buffer, he said, will also help save his voice.

"Given the distance," he said, "I have to yell, 'Save a child today,' 'Give a child a chance.'"

The court's decision likely will lead to further litigation over restrictions on activism around such facilities. Eric Scheidler, the executive director of the Pro-Life Action League, which trains the people who refer to themselves as sidewalk counselors, said buffer zones were only one kind of restriction on activities that state and local governments have tried to impose around clinics.

"It's time to revisit some of these additional restrictions as well," he said.

As Neary held a sign with frayed edges that depicted a fetus on the front with the wording "When they tell you that abortion is a matter just between a woman and her doctor, they're forgetting someone," the military retiree from Medfield, Mass., who usually goes once every two weeks, might have gone unnoticed by many passers-by. But on weekends, there are sometimes dozens of other protesters.

Before Thursday's ruling, many patients and staff members at the clinic had felt some measure of relief because of the no-protest buffer. But no more.

"I think patients and staff will feel a little more at risk and less safe," said Sarah Cyr-Mutty, the community relations coordinator for the Boston Planned Parenthood health center and a member of the volunteer corps that helps escort patients past protesters to the building's entrance. "It's frustrating that it seems like their right to be able to stand up closer to somebody's face is more important than the rights of someone who is trying to access health care," she said.

Officials in Boston said Friday that they would send police officers to provide added security at the clinic.

"The buffer zone was a measure to ensure public safety," said Kate Norton, a spokesman for Mayor Martin Walsh. "Now that it no longer exists, we intend to take necessary steps to ensure that individuals remain safe, which includes an increased police presence until further notice."

In the Supreme Court ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts drew a distinction between those who intimidate protesters and people like Eleanor McCullen, a plaintiff in the case, who he said engage in "personal, caring, consensual conversations with women about various alternatives."

Scheidler, of the Pro-Life Action League, said that distinction was vital.

"There are already remedies in place in the law if there's any kind of activity going on that isn't peaceful -- but what this decision says is that peaceful activity cannot be restricted," he said.

Nicole Clegg, vice president for public policy at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, said, "I don't know if the patient is able to make a distinction between someone quietly offering counseling versus someone who has a camera in their face and someone who is calling them names and intimidating them."

In Portland, Maine, which has a buffer zone ordinance, the decision was received as a call to action by Marie Coyle. Coyle has served for the past two years as a volunteer at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, wearing a neon-pink vest and escorting people past protesters.

She chose that role because she is a former patient at the center and had to make her way past protesters herself.

When she rode up on the bus two years ago, before the city's buffer ordinance was in place, she said, the crowd of protesters was so daunting she thought of staying on the bus. She had gone to talk about birth control options, she said, so she got off the bus and walked along a sidewalk lined with protesters on either side.

"They were yelling and chanting and holding these huge, bloody signs," she said. As she walked, she said, a woman came up behind her, chanting "Mommy, please have mercy on your baby!" and followed so closely that "I could literally feel her breath on my neck as she was shouting."

So she took up the pink vest and began escorting patients every Saturday. But over time, she said, she has spent less time volunteering because the buffer zone "really reduced the need for our presence."

When she saw the news of the Supreme Court decision, she said, "I first thought, 'OK -- Dust off the pink vest.'"

Information for this article was contributed by Timothy Williams of The New York Times.

A Section on 06/28/2014

Upcoming Events