Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc.

Docket No.: 93-880
Argued: April 28, 1994
Decided: June 30, 1994

Topics:

Amendment 1: Speech, Press, and Assembly, Privacy, Abortion, Eighth Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Freedom of Speech, National Labor Relations Act, antitrust, criminal procedure, murder, preliminary injunction, privacy, property rights, public schools, racial discrimination

PartyNames: Judy MADSEN, et al., Petitioners v. WOMEN'S HEALTH CENTER, INC., et al.
Petitioner: Madsen et al.
Respondent: Women's Health Center, Inc., et al.

Supreme Court Docket

Madsen et al.
v.
Women's Health Center, Inc., et al.
512 U.S. 753 (1994)
Other Citations: 114 S.Ct. 2516129 L.Ed.2d 593 (512 U.S.
Question:

1) Is the prohibition of all protesting within the 36-foot buffer zone around the front of the clinic an infringement of the First Amendment right to free speech? 2) Is the 36-foot buffer zone along the back and side of the clinic a breach of the First Amendment right to free speech? 3) Do the limitations imposed on noise-making constitute a breach of the First Amendment right to free speech? 4) Do the restrictions placed on the use of images violate the First Amendment right to free speech? 5) Is it a breach of the First Amendment right to free speech to bar protesters from approaching potential patients when they are within a 300-foot radius of the clinic? 6) Is it a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech to prohibit all protesting in a 300-foot radius of clinic staff residences?

Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc.
ORAL ARGUMENT

April 28, 1994

Holding: affirmed in part and reversed
Decision: Decision: 6 votes for Women's Health Center, Inc., 3 vote(s) against

Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc.
Case Documents

1Opinion in Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc.
2Opinion in Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc.
Additional documents for this case are pending review.