Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
SCOTUS Case

Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York

Primary source

Background below is sourced from Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0). We link back to the source for attribution; edits made by Wikipedia editors after our last scrape may not appear here.

Background

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1997 United States Supreme Court case

Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York, 519 U.S. 357 (1997), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court related to legal protection of access to abortion . The question before the court was whether the First Amendment was violated by placing an injunction on protesters outside abortion clinics . The court ruled in a 6–3 decision that "floating buffer zones" preventing protesters approaching people entering or leaving the clinics were unconstitutional, though "fixed buffer zones" around the clinics themselves remained constitutional. The Court's upholding the fixed buffer was the most important aspect of the ruling, because it was a common feature of injunctions nationwide.

Paul Schenck challenged a Federal District Court injunction that restricted "sidewalk counselors " from approaching abortion clinic patients and others with Bibles , tracts and anti-abortion messages. Because these protesters often violently harassed and intimidated patients and staff or prevented them from entering the clinic, the Court upheld the fixed buffer zone around the clinics, although it struck down the floating buffer zone around individuals because its indefinite and movable nature made it difficult to administer and risked overly restricting free speech.

See also

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schenck_v._Pro-Choice_Network_of_Western_New_York&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: See also")
]

References

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schenck_v._Pro-Choice_Network_of_Western_New_York&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: References")
]

  1. Jump up to: 1 2 Greenhouse, Linda (February 20, 1997). "High Court Upholds 15-Foot Buffer Zone At Abortion Clinics" . The New York Times.

Further reading

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schenck_v._Pro-Choice_Network_of_Western_New_York&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: Further reading")
]

  • Hostetler, Darrin Alan (1997). "Face-to-Face with the First Amendment: Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network and the Right to 'Approach and Offer' in Abortion Clinic Protests". _Stanford Law Review _. 50 (1). Stanford Law Review, Vol. 50, No. 1: 179–223. doi :10.2307/1229361 . JSTOR  1229361 .

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schenck_v._Pro-Choice_Network_of_Western_New_York&action=edit&section=4 "Edit section: External links")
]

show

U.S. Supreme Court Freedom of Speech Clause case law

**First Amendment to the United States Constitution **

Unprotected speech

Strict scrutiny

Overbreadth and
Vagueness doctrines

Symbolic speech

versus conduct

Content-based
restrictions

Content-neutral
restrictions

Compelled speech

…

Read the full Wikipedia article

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.