Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York

The respondents were upstate New York abortion doctors and clinics and an organization dedicated to maintaining access to abortion services. They sought to prevent vocal anti-abortion protestors from physically blocking the entrances to abortion clinics, The District Court issued an injunction that created a “fixed buffer zone” of 15 feet around abortion clinics where protestors were prohibited from demonstrating. The court additionally created “floating buffer zones,” which banned demonstrations within 15 feet of individuals accessing abortion clinics.  The protestors challenged the order, asserting that “buffer zones” violated their First Amendment rights by creating zones that restricted speech. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court, but the Supreme Court struck down the injunction in part. The Court held that while “fixed buffer zone was” were necessary to ensure access to abortion clinics, floating buffer zones were overbroad and therefore unconstitutional.  The dissenting opinion, however, argued that the concept of a “buffer zone” itself unconstitutional because the restrictions did not have any state interest. After this ruling, judges could issue injunctions to create buffer zones to the extent that they remained fixed.

Topics

• Abortion and reproductive health rights
• Gender discrimination

Geographical location

• North America
• United States

Keywords

• constitutional rights
• freedom of speech

Year

• 1997

External URL

• Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York

Court

• Supreme Court of the United States

Type

• Domestic Case Law

Jurisdiction

• United States