On The Front Lines

In A Significant First Amendment Victory, U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Racketeering Judgment and Rules 8-1 in Favor of Pro-life Protesters

U.S. Supreme Court Affirms Rutherford Institute Argument That No 'Extortion' Occurred

Washington, D.C.--The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in favor of the rights of pro-life protesters in Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, the most significant pro-life protest case to come before the court in several years. The Justices ruled 8-1 that abortion providers may not use the courts to prosecute pro-life protesters under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, which was originally created to combat organized crime. RICO outlaws "racketeering activity," including extortion. The Supreme Court's decision affirmed the view argued by attorneys for The Rutherford Institute in a friend of the court brief that RICO cannot be applied against protesters because the protesters did not seek to "obtain" any form of property from abortion clinics. Abortion providers have used RICO to argue that pro-life protesters are "extorting" the right of abortion from clinic owners and patients in the same way that mobsters extort money from shop owners. As a result, the courts have imposed crushing fines on protesters.

In Scheidler, three pro-life protest leaders and their organizations were ordered to pay over a quarter of a million dollars to two Chicago area abortion clinics for their efforts to demonstrate outside the clinics. Although the abortion providers did not prove that the protesters were part of an organized "extortion" ring, the trial court allowed them to link the protesters' actions to various violent acts committed by other anti-abortion protesters. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, ruling that the protesters violated a federal extortion law, the Hobbs Act, even though the law requires proof that the accused individuals sought to obtain the "property" of another person, which was clearly not the intent of the protesters. In the previous 1994 case NOW v. Scheidler, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that RICO could not apply to political protesters. As a result, many abortion protesters have been hesitant to protest. The Court's decision today provides support for First Amendment activity of a wide range of political protesters who could have been subjected to RICO charges, including pro-life protesters, labor picketers and others.

"The Supreme Court's near-unanimous decision gives breathing room for the First Amendment-protected speech of many political groups that have been virtually shut out of public debate because of threats of huge fines like those imposed on these protesters," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "No longer can the civil liability provisions of the RICO Act be used as a bludgeon to silence dissenters from rightfully expressing their views in a public forum."
A copy of Whitehead's white paper analysis, "Scheidler v. NOW II: Operation Rescue, Pro-Life Protest and the Supreme Court" is available at www.rutherford.org.

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

---

Press Contact

Nisha N. Mohammed
Ph: (434) 978-3888, ext. 604; Pager: 800-946-4646, Pin #: 1478257
Email: Nisha N. Mohammed