Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York, 519 U.S. 357 (1997), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court. It ruled in an 8-1 decision that speech-free "buffer zones" around abortion clinics were constitutional. The Court held that "fixed buffer zones" were constitutional, but "floating buffer zones" were not.
Paul Schenck challenged a Federal District Court injunction that restricted anti-abortion "sidewalk counselors" from approaching abortion clinic clients and others with Bibles, tracts and anti-abortion message. The Court rules in Schenck's favor, striking down the restrictions as a fundamental violation of the First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech.
Full citation: 519 U.S. 357, 117 S. Ct. 855 (1997).
[edit] External links
- Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York on Cornell Law
- Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York on the California Anti-SLAPP Project
- Paul Schenck and Dwight Saunders, Petitioners v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York et al. on the Boston College Free Speech Library
- PBS NewsHour: "Drawing the Line"
 |
This abortion-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
This article related to a U.S. Supreme Court case is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
