A Catholic “sidewalk counselor” has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review a New York county law that prevents pro-life protesters from speaking to people near abortion clinics, according to a religious liberty law firm.
Debra Vitagliano is now petitioning the Supreme Court to look at a 2000 court ruling, Hill v. Colorado, which involves a 1993 law that prevents the approach of a person within 8 feet without their consent for the purpose of giving them fliers or counseling, according to law firm Becket.
In June, a federal appeals court ruled that Mrs. Vitagliano can ask the Supreme Court to reconsider the Hill v. Colorado ruling that the law firm says “allowed states and local governments to ban peacefuabortiol life-affirming advocacy on public sidewalks.”
In 2022, the government of New York’s Westchester County passed a measure that restricts discussions about abortion, resources available to women, and alternatives to abortion on public sidewalks near abortion clinics. The law implemented a 100-foot zone around clinics, including public sidewalks.
“This ban on sidewalk counseling deprives abortion-vulnerable women of a final opportunity to receive help and learn about additional resources before potentially making a life-altering choice,” the law firm said, adding that the Supreme Court could render a decision against Hill v. Colorado, which it said was a “major departure from our nation’s protections of free speech.”
In June, the Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the law adopted by Westchester County, located just north of New York City, was valid under the Hill ruling. The court said that it was bound to follow that ruling unless the Supreme Court expressly overturns it.
“No one should be arrested and put behind bars for having peaceful, face-to-face conversations on a public sidewalk,” Mark Rienzi, president and CEO at Becket, said in a statement. “The Court should fix the mistake of Hill and make clear that the First Amendment protects these offers of help and information to women in need.”
“No one’s looking for the right to block or tackle somebody or anything like that. But we are looking for the right to speak peacefully,” he said, according to the Washington Examiner.
