"Standing" Room Only - Abortion Buffer Zone Appeal Denied - Granite Grok

“Standing” Room Only – Abortion Buffer Zone Appeal Denied

bufferzone
You don’t see these in NH because so far our buffer zone law has gone unenforced

An appeals court has upheld a state law from 2014 that creates a 25-foot buffer zone around New Hampshire Abortion clinics, but only because it has never been applied or enforced. Interesting.

Democrats write and pass a law nearly identical to one in Massachusetts thrown out by the US Supreme Court for violating the first amendment. A judge immediately prohibits enforcement of the New Hampshire law pending the outcome of a legal challenge.

But if no one has been “harmed” or has standing the court won’t rule on the constitutionality so a law we’ve never used can’t be overturned.

Have I got that right, so far?

Everyone involved has to pump money into lawyers and courts on the long march to the Supreme Court where no one will have standing except the Constitution and SCOTUS-precedent that no lower court appears willing to use as a filter to save people and taxpayers time and money.

Will it go to the Supreme Court? Does it even need to go that far? Why do we even have it?

The law is two years old. Shouldn’t there be a rogues gallery of aggrieved women who have been abandoned by abortion overlords too timid to implement the buffer zone legislated into existence for their “protection”?

They said they’d build a “wall” to protect us, but no one ever did.

The faces of these women should be visible on the wall in the lobby of every New Hampshire “clinic.” Martyrs in the sisterhood of the scraped womb. Victims of pro-life protesters who just wanted access to ‘women’s health care.’ Their names on the lips of every supplicant as they count out their pagan prayers on a bloody rosary with millions of beads.

I know, that sounds a bit hyperbolic but so were the ridiculous arguments for the buffer zone. And yet we’ve heard nothing from the clinics or their advocates to suggest that women have suffered in the interim.

A thinking man or woman might conclude that the law serves no real need or useful purpose. That the exercise of first amendment rights never interfered with access. That it was merely inconvenient to proprietors whose commercial fortunes might be at risk were potential customers convinced to take their “business” elsewhere because there were other options.

A law to protect a revenue stream that finds its way into the campaign coffers of the people demanding the law in the first place.

But it has been two years since passage. Two years without it ever being used or enforced. Where are the victims?

Fear not for these missing women. There is a Legislative Service Request in the pipeline titled, repealing the law relative to providing certain parameters for access to reproductive health care facilities.  It would take the buffer zone law off the books.

Who wants to bet that the missing victims will come out of hiding at the hearing to protest the repeal of a law that has never been implemented and as such never been enforced?

Committee members should make of point of asking anyone who testifies on such grounds why they do not blame the clinics for refusing to exercise their legal right to enforce a buffer zone to protect these “patients?”

Could the reason be that they know, should they try, that someone would then have standing and the court would throw the law out?

How about we just repeal it and save the taxpayers the cost of a trip to the US Supreme Court? MmmKay?

>