A judge on Friday heard arguments regarding a motion to dismiss a legal challenge against an antiabortion-rights protester for disruptive behavior outside of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Portland, Maine, the Portland Press Herald reports.
During the hearing, Justice Lance Walker did not rule on the motion to dismiss. According to the Press Herald, Walker questioned the defense more sharply than the prosecution, but he did not otherwise indicate how he would rule (Dolan, Portland Press Herald, 3/12).
Background
The lawsuit follows the Portland City Council's 2014 decision to strike down an ordinance that placed a 39-foot buffer zone around the Planned Parenthood clinic. The council overturned the buffer zone legislation after the Supreme Court struck down a similar law in Massachusetts.
The lawsuit states that the protester, Brian Ingalls, violated the state's Civil Rights Act because his protests disrupted others' access to health care services. Ingalls is a frequent protester outside the clinic, and the lawsuit states that he persisted in yelling even after police asked him to lower his voice.
Under the state's Civil Rights Act, patients have the right to access "safe and effective" health care services without being interrupted by disruptive noise. Maine Attorney General Janet Mills (D), who filed the lawsuit, is asking the court to order Ingalls to stay at least 50 feet away from Planned Parenthood clinics and to fine him as much as $5,000 for violating the state law.
In November 2015, Mills said, "All patients have the right to receive medical services free of 'the cacophony of political protests,' in the words of the United States Supreme Court." She added, "While protesters have every right to say anything they want in a public area in the vicinity of a medical facility, they are not permitted to disrupt another citizen's healthcare services" (Women's Health Policy Report, 11/12/15).
Hearing details
At the hearing Friday, Stephen Whiting, Ignalls' attorney, said the court should dismiss the case, arguing that Ingalls' right to free speech under federal law outweighs a woman's right to access health care under state law. Whiting argued that the state cannot apply Maine's Civil Rights Act in a manner that violates an individual's right to free speech under the First Amendment.
In response, Walker said, "You can in certain places, certain times and certain manners. That's what we're really talking about, isn't it?"
Further, Whiting -- who said he helped draft the state's Civil Rights Act --- also argued the court should dismiss the case because Whiting and his colleagues never intended the law to apply "to street preaching or other speech activity." However, Walker said the case would be decided based on the text of the law, not lawmakers' intentions behind the law as discussed prior to the legislation's passage.
Separately, Assistant Attorney General Leanne Robbin noted that the state has defended antiabortion-rights protesters in 10 previous lawsuits. Further, she said abortion-rights opponents have protested outside of the Planned Parenthood clinic for several months before Ingalls' disruptive behavior.
Robbin said, "We're [suing] Mr. Ingalls because of how loud he is [protesting] and because of the impact he is having on the counselor who is trying to provide patients with important information about the procedures that they are going to undergo, the releases they need to sign and the decisions they need to make about their healthcare." She noted, "When he disturbs the medical care, that's when he goes over the line."
Robbin said the state has video evidence showing Ingalls addressing a patient directly through the clinic's second-story window, which she argues shows that he hoped to disrupt the person's health care (Portland Press Herald, 3/12).
