Williams v. Planned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo, Inc.

Background

A California clinic and a group of anti-abortion protesters fought over a permanent injunction that limits protesters to a public sidewalk separated from the clinic by a busy four-lane avenue. The state trial court and the California Supreme Court upheld broad limits on the protesters’ activities, citing the need to protect clinic patients from increased stress and anxiety. The case returned to the United States Supreme Court after an earlier remand for reconsideration under the Court’s Madsen decision.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court ultimately declined to take up the case, leaving the California court’s approval of the injunction in place. Justice Scalia’s dissent argues that the record did not show serious unlawful conduct or physical obstruction, and that the California court improperly relied on preventing “stress and anxiety” and later invented an “access” justification after remand. The dissent also points to this Court’s later Schenck decision as undercutting the state court’s main theory.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court denied review, the California injunction remains effective and protesters continue to be confined to the sidewalk across the avenue rather than near the clinic entrance. The record cited in the dissent shows testimony that clinic staff did not see protesters physically block entry, but the state courts upheld restraints aimed at reducing emotional upset for patients. The Supreme Court’s denial leaves those state-level restrictions in place without a national ruling on the merits.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Scalia, joined by Justices Kennedy and Thomas, dissented from the denial. He would have granted review, reversed the state court, and remanded, arguing the record lacked support for excluding protesters from the public sidewalk.