SCOTUS turns down abortion clinic buffer zone challenge, Thomas slams 'abdication' of duty

Thomas and fellow conservative Justice Samuel Alito dissented, with Thomas arguing SCOTUS should have taken up the case, Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale, Illinois. Alito did not explain his reasoning in writing.

The votes of four justices are required to grant a writ of certiorari to bring a case up for review.

"This case would have allowed us to provide needed clarity to lower courts," Thomas wrote in his dissent.

In that case, decided in 2000, the Supreme Court upheld a Colorado statute that prohibited individuals from "knowingly" approaching within eight feet of another person within 100 feet of a healthcare facility entrance, without consent, for purposes such as passing out literature, displaying signs, or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling. 

The court determined this law was a content-neutral regulation of the time, place and manner of speech, serving the state's interest in protecting individuals entering healthcare facilities from unwanted communication. The decision was 6-3, with Justices Thomas, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy dissenting.

The City of Carbondale, in southern Illinois, saw an uptick in pro-life protests after two clinics opened following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022. As such, the city passed ordinances modeled after Colorado's statutes.

One key case that followed Hill v. Colorado is McCullen v. Coakley, where the Supreme Court ruled in 2014 on a Massachusetts law that established a 35-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics. The high court found that while the state had a legitimate interest in protecting patients and staff from harassment, the law was overly broad, included too much space and infringed on free speech rights.

The court struck down the law, distinguishing it from the Hill decision.

Fox News Digital has reached out to Coalition Life for comment.