Students for Life of America

Amicus Brief Summary

Students for Life of America (SFLA) relies on sidewalk counseling, that is, person-to-person contacts include passing out literature and engaging in oral education and counseling.

SFLA carries out these activities in New York, so the challenged ordinance adversely affects its ability to convey a message of life. More generally, the Courts’ continued reliance on Hill v. Colorado, the exclusion of McCullen v. Coakley, and Reed v. Town of Gilbert, poses a threat to Students for Life’s constitutionally protected interest in persuading pregnant students to carry their babies to term instead of aborting them and SFLA’s continued advocacy and guidance in the public square.

The Court should overrule a previous decision in Hill v. Colorado, which banned persons with the intent of “engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling” (read: pro-lifers) from approaching another person within eight feet outside of abortion facilities unless that person consents. The law specifically disallows counseling but permits activities such as wearing a hot dog costume to advertise a restaurant.

Hill not only prohibits our life-saving work but unconstitutionally regulates pro-life speech more strictly than other forms of public speech.

Therefore, we the undersigned, as that the Court immediately overrule the previous decision.

  • Co-sign Our Amicus Brief Now!