Anti-abortion activists worry New Jersey abortion clinic law chills protected speech

This story raises questions about governance, accountability, and American values.

Source: Washington Examiner
1 min read
Why This Matters

Sidewalk counseling has been around for decades. It's a person standing on public property, sometimes holding a sign, sometimes just quietly offering a pamphlet to someone walking into a clinic. You don't have to like it.

New Republican Times Editorial Board

Anti-abortion activists worry New Jersey abortion clinic law chills protected speech
Image via Washington Examiner

A recent New Jersey law is raising free speech concerns among anti-abortion advocates over its increased penalties for interfering with “reproductive health care” clinics, with some activists worrying it could discourage peaceful prayer and sidewalk counseling outside abortion clinics.

Gov. Mikie Sherrill (D) signed S2260 on Friday, describing it as a safeguard for patients and […]

How We See It

New Republican Times Editorial Board

Sidewalk counseling has been around for decades. It's a person standing on public property, sometimes holding a sign, sometimes just quietly offering a pamphlet to someone walking into a clinic. You don't have to like it. But it's speech, and it's been treated as protected speech by courts for a long time. New Jersey just signed a law that ratchets up penalties for "interfering" with reproductive health clinics, and the definition of interference is vague enough that activists are right to ask whether standing on a sidewalk with a rosary now counts.

Gov. Sherrill's office is framing this as patient protection, which sounds reasonable until you notice the law doesn't distinguish between someone blocking a doorway and someone praying quietly forty feet away. That distinction matters. Nobody on the right is out here defending clinic blockades or harassment campaigns; those things are already illegal under federal law and have been for thirty years. What's new here is the chilling effect on the boring, peaceful stuff, the stuff that annoys people but doesn't stop anyone from doing anything.

This is the pattern with laws like this. They get sold as narrow safety measures aimed at extreme conduct, then get written broadly enough to sweep in ordinary expression that someone in power finds unpleasant. If a state wants to punish actual intimidation or obstruction, fine, write that law and enforce it. But when the language is elastic enough that a quiet prayer vigil might trigger criminal penalties, the burden is on the state to explain why, not on the activists to prove they weren't doing anything wrong.

Free speech protections aren't supposed to bend based on which side of a hot-button issue you're standing on. If New Jersey wants to test that principle by prosecuting someone for holding a sign on a public sidewalk, they should expect the courts to have something to say about it.

Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.