Supreme Court won’t hear PA abortion clinic free speech case
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is declining to get involved in a case about free speech outside a Pittsburgh abortion clinic.
The high court turned away the case Monday. The court’s decision not to hear the case leaves in place a 2019 appeals court decision that upheld a Pittsburgh ordinance creating a 15-foot “buffer zone” where protests are barred around entrances to health care facilities. The decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed “sidewalk counseling” within that zone.
The appeals court said the city can restrict congregating, picketing, patrolling and demonstrating in the immediate vicinity of clinics, but the zone restrictions do not apply to “calm and peaceful” one-on-one conversations by anti-abortion activists seeking to speak with women entering a clinic.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that he agreed with the court’s decision not to take up this particular case because it “involves unclear, preliminary questions about the proper interpretation of state law.” But he said the court should take up the issue of buffer zones in an appropriate case.
Supreme Court rejects fast track for Trump election cases
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday formally refused to put on a fast track election challenges filed by President Donald Trump and his allies.
The court rejected pleas for quick consideration of cases involving the outcome in five states won by President-elect Joe Biden: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
The orders, issued without comment, were unsurprising. The justices had previously taken no action in those cases in advance of last week’s counting of the electoral votes in Congress, which confirmed Biden’s victory.
The court still could act on appeals related to the Nov. 3 election later this winter or in the spring. Several justices had expressed interest in a Pennsylvania case involving the state Supreme Court’s decision to extend the deadline for receipt of mailed ballots by three days, over the opposition of the Republican-controlled legislature.
But even if the court were to take up an election-related case, it probably wouldn’t hear arguments until the fall.
High court won’t hear environmentalist’s appeal over criticism
STUART, Fla. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by a Florida environmentalist that sought to set aside a $4 million judgment over her criticism of a rock mining project near the Everglades.
The court without comment Monday decided not to consider the free speech case involving Maggy Hurchalla, 79, who is the sister of former Attorney General Janet Reno.
Hurchalla was appealing a 2018 jury verdict that imposed the multi-million penalty. The company, Lake Point Restoration, argued that Hurchalla’s comments about the rock project amounted to a violation of a contract it had with Martin County.
In an email Monday to The Associated Press, Hurchalla said she was disappointed but hoped the court would find another case to protect free speech rights in such debates with corporations and government entities.
“I would have thought that these times, above all others, would affirm the importance of the First Amendment right to peacefully tell government what to do,” Hurchalla said. “Without it, there is no “We the people”. If you can’t sort out what’s right by public discussion, the alternatives are dictatorship or violence.”
