[Marxism] wrong group and wrong politics ... but It's Alright With Me

[Brian Shannon <brian_shannon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Of course, it's a perversion of Cole Porter's lyrics* and my outlook
to reference them to "pro-life" demonstrators or to a Supreme Court
decision, but I am relieved about the latest ruling. When it comes to
civil liberties, extreme opposites can indeed attract and an 8-0
ruling is a positive gain for civil liberties.

Brian Shannon
_____________________

Update 6: Supreme Court Backs Abortion Protesters
By TONI LOCY , 02.28.2006, 06:19 PM
        
A 20-year-old legal fight over protests outside abortion clinics
ended Tuesday with the Supreme Court ruling that federal extortion
and racketeering laws cannot be used against demonstrators.

The 8-0 decision was a setback for abortion clinics that were buoyed
when the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals kept their case alive two
years ago despite the high court's 2003 ruling that had cleared the
way for lifting a nationwide injunction on anti-abortion leader
Joseph Scheidler and others.

Anti-abortion groups appealed to the justices after the lower court
sought to determine whether the injunction could be supported by
findings that protesters had made threats of violence.

[The middle portion is a summary of the position of NOW, which in my
opinion is completely off track in its ignoring the real threat of
RICO to the civil liberties of us all.]

NOW's legal strategy was novel at the time, relying on civil
provisions of the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act, which was used predominantly in criminal cases against organized
crime. The lawsuit also relied on the Hobbs Act, a 55-year-old law
banning extortion.

A federal judge issued a nationwide injunction against the anti-
abortion protesters after a Chicago jury found in 1998 that
demonstrators had engaged in a pattern of racketeering by interfering
with clinic operations, menacing doctors, assaulting patients and
damaging clinic property.

But the Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that the extortion law could not
be used against the protesters because they had not illegally
"obtained property" from women seeking to enter clinics to receive
abortions.

Justice Samuel Alito did not participate in the decision because he
was not a member of the court when the case was argued.

The cases are Scheidler v. NOW, 04-1244, and Operation Rescue v. NOW,
04-1352.

FULL AT http://makeashorterlink.com/?S42E248BC

Brian Shannon
____________________

* http://www.ripcat.free-online.co.uk/waitshtml/
itsalrightwithmelyrics.htm




________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism