Justice Thomas Condemns Supreme Court’s ‘Abdication’ On Pro-Life Speech Rights

The Supreme Court declined to hear two challenges to abortion clinic buffer zone laws, prompting strong criticism from Justice Clarence Thomas, who called the refusal an “abdication of our judicial duty.” The decision leaves in place rulings that uphold restrictions on pro-life advocacy near abortion clinics.

The case stemmed from an ordinance in Carbondale, Illinois, that barred individuals from speaking, counseling, or protesting within 100 feet of an abortion facility. A similar law in Englewood, New Jersey, restricts access to within eight feet of clinic entrances, effectively preventing pro-life activists from engaging with women seeking abortions.

Thomas, who dissented along with Justice Samuel Alito, argued that the court missed an opportunity to overturn Hill v. Colorado, the 2000 ruling that upheld abortion clinic buffer zones. He maintained that Hill was wrongly decided and that restrictions on pro-life speech cannot stand in light of the court’s 2022 Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade.

“Hill has been seriously undermined, if not completely eroded,” Thomas wrote, adding that lower courts continue to enforce unconstitutional limits on speech. He noted that buffer zones force pro-life counselors to stand in busy streets, making it nearly impossible to have meaningful conversations with women outside clinics.

While Carbondale repealed its ordinance in 2024, Englewood’s remains in place, along with similar laws in other states. Thomas argued that these speech restrictions unfairly target pro-life advocates and violate their First Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court’s decision to sidestep the issue leaves activists without a clear path forward, while buffer zones remain a legal hurdle for those seeking to speak against abortion outside clinics.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR