ACLJ Replies in Federal Court Case Supporting Pro-Life Sidewalk Counselors | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

ACLJ Profile Completion

Verified

Supporting Pro-Life Sidewalk Counselors in Federal Case

By Michelle Terry1545836400000

This week the ACLJ, on behalf of our clients Anthony Miano and Nicholas Rolland, replied to a brief filed by the Defendants, Iowa Attorney General Thomas Miller and Johnson County Attorney Janet Lyness, in our case, Miano v. Miller, in federal court in Iowa.

As we told you here, on November 27th, the ACLJ filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction on behalf of our clients. In this case the ACLJ is challenging an Iowa state statute which makes it a misdemeanor to make “loud and raucous noise in the vicinity of any residence or public building which causes unreasonable distress to the occupants thereof.” Our clients conduct pro-life outreach outside of abortion clinics in Iowa, and have suffered arrest and threats of future arrest and prosecution for their pro-life speech activities.

The government Defendants responded to our Motion by filing a Resistance Brief on December 11th. Defendants’ Resistance focuses substantially on the assumption that loud speech is not protected by the First Amendment. Defendants also contend that because the state has an interest in protecting the safety and welfare of its citizens, that it may silence speakers when it sees fit – or, as here, when a speaker causes “distress” to someone nearby.

We promptly filed a Reply Brief on December 18th, outlining the flaws in the Defendants’ arguments and reiterating our request that the District Court prevent Defendants from enforcing this unconstitutional law against our clients and anyone else in Johnson County, Iowa, who wants to conduct the same type of ministry.

We explained that the First Amendment does not apply only when “one keeps his or her voice down and engages in a polite protest. . . . Public protest, demonstration, and dissemination of ideas and beliefs are no less protected by the First Amendment simply because they may be loud.” Moreover, speech cannot be prohibited simply because someone takes offense to it. Such a threshold as this would be “so inherently subjective that it would be inconsistent with [the Supreme Court’s] longstanding refusal to [punish speech] because the speech in question may have an adverse emotional impact on the audience.”

We will continue to keep you updated as this case progresses. In the meantime, please join the fight to defend the unborn and sign our petition against pro-abortion laws. Your support on pro-life matters throughout 2018 has been invaluable, and we are grateful. We look forward to continuing to work together with you in 2019 on behalf of the unborn and their mothers.

Defeat Pro-Abortion Laws & the Abortion Industry

Pro Life  Signatures

LOGIN

Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.

$20
$40
$60
$120
$240
Make this a monthly tax-deductible gift.

We're aggressively battling in federal court to defeat the abortion industry & pro-abortion laws. Your gift - of any size - will help save lives.

Email Address is required.
First Name is required.
Last Name is required.
Credit Card Number is required.
Verification Code is required.
Expiration Month is required.
Expiration Year is required.
Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.
Encourage your friends to sign and donate by sharing this petition.
Latest in
Pro Life

Radio Recap – Is There Room in the Democrat Party for Pro-Lifers?

By Jordan Sekulow1581634317899

Is there any room left for pro-life voters in the Democrat Party? On today’s Jay Sekulow Live we discussed, because of Senator Amy Klobuchar’s comments , the question of whether or not pro-life voters are welcome in the Democrat Party. Senator Klobuchar said on ABC: Well first, I say this; I’m...

read more

Trump Admin Declares California’s Abortion Action Illegal

By Walter M. Weber1580425019669

The government of California apparently prides itself on being pro-abortion. They filed a brief opposing even the modest regulation of abortion at issue in the current Supreme Court case of June Medical Services v. Gee (we filed a brief of our own exposing the dangers of abortion ). They tried...

read more

President Trump Makes Historic Appearance at March for Life

By Jordan Sekulow1579887900000

From the beginning of his Presidency, President Trump has committed his Administration to protecting life. He has already made good on that promise time and time again, but now he has made history, standing up for the voiceless unborn at our nation’s largest annual pro-life rally. President Trump...

read more

Virginia’s Legislative Majority Proposes Alarming Abortion Laws

By Jordan Sekulow1579701600000

Virginia’s new radical pro-abortion legislative majority wasted no time in attempting to enact their Planned Parenthood sponsored agenda, proposing an amendment to codify abortion in Virginia’s Constitution. Not only that, but they are proposing a slew of bills designed to eliminate key pro-life...

read more