DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES v. J.G., A CHILD AND STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the defendant engaged 117 1 in physical obstruction by kneeling in front of an emergency exit door even 2 though he did not actually block anyone from exiting
• stating that the government has a significant interest in “‘ensuring public safety and order’”
• explaining that 4 indirect forms of obstruction are covered by the “broadly phrased” FACE
• affirming an injunction under the FACE Act because “[t]he district court found that [the defendant] intentionally interfered with persons seeking reproductive care by physically obstructing access to the clinic, or at least attempting to do so.”
• upholding district court’s determination that FACE defendant acted with “requisite specific intent”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).