Boston, MA

This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an anti-choice challenge to a 2007 Massachusetts statute creating a fixed 35-foot “buffer zone” around the entrances and driveways of reproductive health care facilities.

This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an anti-choice challenge to a 2007 Massachusetts statute creating a fixed 35-foot “buffer zone” around the entrances and driveways of reproductive health care facilities.  In August 2008, a federal district court found the statute constitutional on its face, prompting opponents of a woman’s right to choose to appeal all the way to the nation’s High Court. Because this is a state law, Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office has taken the lead in defending the public safety measure.

“No one should have to face harassment or fear violence when they are seeking or providing reproductive health services,” said Andrea Miller, Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts.  “The federal district court recognized that the legislature struck a careful, constitutional balance when it passed this law protecting the safety, dignity, and privacy of patients and health care workers throughout the Commonwealth without infringing on free speech rights.”
“We applaud the Attorney General for her office’s vigorous defense of this landmark legislation and call on people on both sides of the reproductive rights debate to recognize that public safety transcends politics,” she continued.
NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts is the state’s leading advocate for privacy and a woman’s right to choose.
Back to News