Pittsburgh Poised to Repeal Ordinance Banning Pro-Life Leaflets | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

By Jay Sekulow1311345802000

I wanted to bring you an update on a case that we've been involved in since last year - a case that has significant ramifications for the First Amendment.

As you may recall, we secured an important victory in federal court last fall against the City of Pittsburgh. The issue: an ordinance that violated the constitutional rights of pro-life advocates.

It all began last fall when we filed a federal lawsuit challenging Pittsburgh Ordinance 601.02, which prohibited the distribution of leaflets in the City. Our clients wanted to distribute pro-life leaflets - in the days leading up to the November election - on unoccupied parked cars without fear of fine, penalty or censure.

Our lawsuit was clear: the ordinance was unconstitutional. It was overbroad, vague and impinged on the rights of free speech and due process that the United States Constitution guarantees.

The court acted quickly. It granted our request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in October, clearing the way for our clients to distribute the materials before the November election. U.S. District Judge David S. Cercone found that our arguments demonstrated "a likelihood of success on the merits" and enjoined the City from enforcing the ordinance. In February, Judge Cercone issued an order granting our motion for a preliminary injunction, explaining that the City's desire to control littering by barring the distribution of the leaflets did not outweigh the constitutional rights of our clients.

In recent months, we have focused on efforts to permanently resolve this case. And, now the City of Pittsburgh is moving forward to remove this troubling ordinance, which was adopted in 2008. The City already has agreed to pay $35,000 in attorneys' fees to settle the suit and is moving forward with legislation in City Council to repeal it.

In an editorial entitled - "Speech is speech: Pittsburgh must remove an offensive ban" - the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette concluded:

"The purpose of the 2008 ordinance was to restrict leafleting in the interests of curbing littering. In a city where litter is a problem, especially Downtown, the ordinance made some superficial sense. But what seems a potential source of litter to one person is free speech to another -- and that right isn't superficial, it's fundamental." As the Post-Gazette put it: "It doesn't matter whether the speech takes a position that is pro-life or pro-choice - it's all protected."

I will keep you posted on when this problematic ordinance is taken off the books in the City of Pittsburgh.

Latest in
Pro Life

51 Pro-Life Senators Must Vote to Defund

By Benjamin P. Sisney1448400001249

The U.S. Senate is expected to vote on defunding Planned Parenthood before the end of the year in the wake of moral outrage surrounding the sale of babies’ body parts and the House passing a bipartisan bill to defund the nation’s largest abortion provider. Earlier this year, a radical pro-abortion...

read more

Abortion Giant Sends Pro-life Tweet?

By Palmer Williams1448049538740

Planned Parenthood just doesn't get it. They're so blinded by their own ideology of defending the indefensible - the murder of the most vulnerable members of our society - that they often speak in paradoxes. Just last week on Twitter, Planned Parenthood quoted Hillary Clinton in a way that made...

read more

From Darkness to Light

By Joseph Williams1447781596622

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” – Ephesians 6:12, KJV When we first walked into the office of Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic...

read more

Supreme Court to Review TX Abortion Regs

By Walter M. Weber1447447845712

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will hear a constitutional challenge, by abortionists and abortion businesses, to Texas abortion regulations requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital and requiring abortion facilities to meet basic, common-sense safety...

read more