Planned Parenthood V. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Touro Law Review Volume 29 Number 2 Article 13 October 2013 Speech as a Weapon: Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard Alex J. Berkman Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Health Law and Policy Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Law and Society Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons, and the Privacy Law Commons Recommended Citation Berkman, Alex J. (2013) "Speech as a Weapon: Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard," Touro Law Review: Vol. 29 : No. 2 , Article 13. Available at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss2/13 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Touro Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Speech as a Weapon: Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard Cover Page Footnote 29-2 This comment is available in Touro Law Review: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss2/13 Berkman: Speech as a Weapon SPEECH AS A WEAPON: PLANNED PARENTHOOD V. AMERICAN COALITION OF LIFE ACTIVISTS AND THE NEED FOR A REASONABLE LISTENER STANDARD Alex J. Berkman* ** I. INTRODUCTION On May 31, 2009, Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed at his church in Kansas.1 Prior to his death, Dr. Tiller, one of the nation‘s only late-term abortion providers, was regularly targeted by anti- abortion extremist groups.2 Along with other physicians, Dr. Tiller had been the target of violence and the subject of ―Wanted‖ and ―Unwanted‖ posters on anti-abortion websites.3 In addition to offers of rewards for personal information on abortion providers, the web- sites published, and continue to publish, the so-called ―Nuremberg Files.‖4 The Nuremberg Files consist of a list of names displayed us- ing different typefaces to signify whether the doctors, clinic workers, or judges remained alive––normal lettering signified the doctor was alive, grey signified he or she had been injured, and a line through the * J.D. Candidate 2013, Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg School of Law; B.A. 2009, Stony Brook University. I would like to thank Professor Eileen Kaufman for all of her assistance with this Comment. ** Please note some of the following footnotes may contain Internet sources depicting expli- cit content. 1 Robin Abcarian & Nicholas Riccardi, Abortion Doctor Fatally Shot; George Tiller Had Long Been Targeted Over Late-Term Procedures, CHI. TRIB., June 1, 2009, at C10. 2 Id. 3 Id.; see also Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette, Inc. v. Am. Coalition of Life Activists, 290 F.3d 1058, 1063-67 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc) (listing physicians who had been murdered pursuant to ―Wanted‖ posters describing each as an abortionist); Alleged Ab- ortionists and Their Accomplices: Tiller the Killer Aborted!, THE CHRISTIAN GALLERY NEWS SERV., http://christiangallery.com/atrocity/aborts.html (last visited Jan. 24, 2013) (naming abortionists who were either wounded or murdered). 4 See Alleged Abortionists and Their Accomplices, supra note 3 (displaying the informa- tion contained in the Nuremberg Files). 485 Published by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center, 2013 1 Touro Law Review, Vol. 29 [2013], No. 2, Art. 13 486 TOURO LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29 name meant that he or she was dead.5 Four Oregon physicians and two clinics sought judicial inter- vention against the American Coalition of Life Activists (―ACLA‖), the anti-abortion extremist group that began the use of ―Wanted‖ posters and the Nuremberg Files while advocating the use of violence in pursuing its cause.6 In Planned Parenthood of the Colum- bia/Willamette, Inc. v. American Coalition of Life Activists,7 the Ninth Circuit affirmed a permanent injunction and an award of compensato- ry damages against the ACLA.8 In reaching its decision, the court looked to the history of violence in the anti-abortion movement and the nature of the statements in question.9 The court emphasized that the violent history of the movement, specifically targeting physicians and clinics, converted otherwise innocuous statements into intention- al threats and intimidation under the Freedom of Access to Clinic En- trances Act (―the FACE Act‖).10 Context, thus, plays a role in the determination of whether a statement targeting an individual or group of individuals is protected by the First Amendment, but such classification largely depends on the standard of review applied.11 In Planned Parenthood, the Ninth Circuit applied a reasonable speaker standard, an objective test rely- ing on whether a reasonable person in the speaker‘s position would consider the statement to be threatening.12 Although the reasonable speaker standard led the Ninth Circuit to render the correct decision in Planned Parenthood, it is inherently flawed. Opinions regarding abortion, one of the most divisive issues in America, can vary widely based on geography.13 This lack of uniformity in opinion leads to a 5 Id. 6 Planned Parenthood, 290 F.3d at 1062. 7 290 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2002). 8 Id. at 1088. 9 Id. at 1083. 10 Id.; 18 U.S.C. § 248 (2006). 11 E.g., United States v. Landham, 251 F.3d 1072 (6th Cir. 2001); Bauer v. Sampson, 261 F.3d 775 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Hart, 212 F.3d 1067 (8th Cir. 2000); Metz v. Dep‘t of the Treasury, 780 F.2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 1986). 12 Planned Parenthood, 290 F.3d at 1074, 1076. 13 See Lydia Saad, Repulicans‟, Dems‟ Abortion Views Grow More Polarized: Republi- cans Have Grown More Conservative on Abortion Since 1975; Democrats, More Liberal, GALLUP (Mar. 8, 2010), http://www.gallup.com/poll/126374/Republicans-Dems-Abortion- Views-Grow-Polarized.aspx (illustrating ―Americans‘ views on the extent to which abortion should be legal‖ by comparing the outlook of Democrats and Republicans from the years https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss2/13 2 Berkman: Speech as a Weapon 2013] SPEECH AS A WEAPON 487 legitimate concern that one who believes abortion is wrong in all cir- cumstances may consider one‘s effort to end a physician‘s practice through threats justified. That risk based on one‘s opinion of abor- tion shows the need for a more concrete, static standard of review.14 This Comment will propose the adoption of a reasonable lis- tener standard, rather than the oft-applied reasonable speaker stan- dard, through an analysis of Supreme Court decisions, the Ninth Cir- cuit‘s reasoning in Planned Parenthood, and an overview of the violent history stemming from the anti-abortion extremist movement. The reasonable listener standard would focus on whether a reasona- ble person in the target‘s place would consider the statements made by anti-abortion extremist groups to be intentionally threatening. Section II will discuss the anti-abortion movement‘s history of vi- olence, including the murder of abortion providers and terrorist acts targeting women‘s health clinics, and the continued use of violent rhetoric by groups similar to the ACLA. Section III will focus on the history of free speech limitations and the importance of a historical context in determining whether arguably threatening speech may be prohibited. Section IV will examine the importance and impact of the Ninth Circuit‘s opinion in Planned Parenthood. Section V will argue for the adoption of a reasonable listener standard by courts which decide cases involving the use of targeted, threatening rhetoric. Section VI will discuss the shortcomings of the FACE Act as well as suggest changes to increase accountability for the use of threatening rhetoric. 1975 to 2009); Lydia Saad, Common State Abortion Restrictions Spark Mixed Reviews, GALLUP (July 25, 2011), http://www.gallup.com/poll/148631/common-state-abortion- restrictions-spark-mixed-reviews.aspx (showing how some Americans favor specific types of abortion restriction laws, but oppose others—―[m]ost Americans favor abortion consent laws; oppose clinic funding bans, late-term abortions‖); RealClearPolitics Electoral College, REAL CLEAR POL., http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/ (last visited Jan. 24, 2013) (demonstrating the 2008 presidential election results by state). One‘s opinion of abortion in relation to an identified political affiliation along with election results establish a correlation between a state and the population‘s assumed perspective on abortion. Id. 14 See Planned Parenthood, 290 F.3d at 1088 (finding that the ―Wanted‖ posters naming the abortionists posed a true threat). The court noted that ―ACLA and physicians knew of this, and both understood the significance of the particular posters specifically identifying each of them. ACLA realized that ‗wanted‘ or ‗guilty‘ posters had a threatening meaning that physicians would take seriously.‖ Id. Published by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center, 2013 3 Touro Law Review, Vol. 29 [2013], No. 2, Art. 13 488 TOURO LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29 II. THE RECENT HISTORY OF VIOLENT ACTS AND ASSOCIATED INTERNET THREATS AGAINST ABORTION PROVIDERS Since 1993, the anti-abortion movement has been closely connected with extreme acts of violence, including abortion clinic bombings, shootings, and murder.15 On March 10, 1993, Dr. David Gunn was shot and killed from behind by Michael Frederick Griffin outside of an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida.16 In August of that same year, Dr. George Patterson was shot and killed after his name and personal information had been circulated on ―Wanted‖ posters.17 In July 1994, Paul Hill, a member of Defensive Action, an an- ti-abortion extremist group, shot three people at a Florida abortion clinic.18 Hill killed Dr.