# Amicus Curiae Brief — National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385017_1130%3A25 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Amicus Curiae Brief - **Published:** January 1, 1994 - **Citation:** 510 U.S. 249 ## Text im b Lede) No. 92-780 AUG 13 1593 | AARNE RNR HE CLERK IN THE eaten Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1993 NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN, INC., on behalf of itself and its women members and other women who use or may use the services of women’s health centers that provide abortions; DELAWARE WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS, INC.; and SUMMIT WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION, INC., on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated clinics, ‘a Petitioners, JOSEPH SCHEIDLER, ef al., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit BRIEF FOR THE NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA, INC. AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS ELAINE METLIN Counsel of Record NANCIE A. THOMAS 2101 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 828-2263 CELESTE LACY DAVIS EVE W. PAUL ROGER K. EVANS LEGAL ACTION FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. 810 Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10019 Attorneys fox Amici Curiae Sam ences WiLeon « Eras PRINTING Co.. INC. - 789-0096 - WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001 Tal ees Re cops ee yee ae, ae ee eS TABLE OF CONTENTS BE: GRAAL AS WR RaD sek Ee On EIS oer a ee z II. RICO IS A BROAD REMEDY THAT CAN AND SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO COM- BAT THE VIOLENT AND INTIMIDATING TACTICS OF MILITANT ANTIABORTION poe yy sy gt! 6 hs cee nc eeR ABORTION PROVIDERS HAVE SUFFERED VAST INJURY TO THEIR BUSINESS AND PROPERTY DUE TO RESPONDENTS’ AC- A ei caleocesnencinn os alll 23 acid rendered the San Antonio Clinic uninhabitable for at least four days, made many employees ill ** and caused thousands of dollars worth of damage. In addition to damaging the interior of the San Antonio Clinic, butyric acid also seeped into the insulation of the building, which had to be torn out and replaced. The police have not caught the vandals. 4. Florida Women’s Medical Clinic—Oakland Park, Florida The Florida Women’s Medical Clinic in Oakland Park, Florida (the “Florida Clinic”) has been housed in a multi-tenant office building since 1976. The Florida Clinic serves a range of patients, from middle-income women to Haitian and other refugees. It also provides prenatal and other services for the Department of Health. The Florida Clinic has tried to set its fees as low as possible because it is the only option for many lower-income women. Over the past four years, beginning in 1989, anti- abortion activists shot out five plate-glass windows at the Florida Clinic, dumped motor oil on the front doors, strewed nails in the parking lot and super-glued the locks, causing an estimated $7,000 worth of property damage. Two physicians quit working at the Florida Clinic due to the harassment.” The Florida Clinic’s lease expires at the end of August 1993. The landlord has decided not to renew the lease because, due to the harassment and damage, he cannot attract other tenants to the building and is losing money. The clinic’s move to its new site will cost $26,000. 24 See States News, sup a note 17. 25One physician ceased performing abortions altogether; the other is now working at a clinic which has not been harassed. 24 5. Clinic “X” 26 Clinic X, which provides OB/GYN services, including abortion services, to a primarily inner-city, indigent cli- entele that comes from a_ several-hundred-mile radius, opened in 1983. Approximately fifty to sixty percent (50-60% ) of Clinic X’s patients are Medicaid patients. Clinic X is located in a region with the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in the state. During a two-week period in 1992, Operation Rescue targeted Clinic X and the other clinics in the city with massive blockades, invasions and increased harassment of staff and patients. Although Clinic X regularly sees ap- proximately 100 patients per week, during this period Clinic X saw only 19 patients the first week and 35 pa- tients the second week. Many patients who canceled or rescheduled appointments explaified that they were afraid of the blockaders. This drop of sixty-five to eighty per- cent (65-80% ) cost Clinic X more than $38,000 in lost revenues.” One staff member of Clinic X quit just prior to the commencement of the two-week period because she feared harassment. Two other staff members did not come to work during those two weeks, citing fear for their per- sonal safety if they attempted to enter the clinic. CONCLUSION The foregoing case studies, while not an exhaustive review, illustrate the illegal activities of a radical fringe of the antiabortion movement. This fringe is, in fact, a well-funded enterprise that is national in scope. The enterprise is both violent and intimidating; it regularly conspires to engage in acts of extortion, arson, vandalism ° 26 The name and location of Clinic X have been kept confidential at the request of the clinic administrator. 27 This figure does not include legal fees. 25 and assault and it regularly succeeds in its aims. There is no question that the enterprise seeks to harm, and does harm, abortion providers in their business and property. Indeed, it has defined and declared its intent to “inter- fere with and even stop the business of abortion.” Joseph Scheidler, Closed: 99 Ways to Stop Abortion 18 (1985). Having established a systematic method of attacking abor- tion clinics, the enterprise is now also targeting the abor- tion-providing physician or, in the words of Operation Rescue’s Randall Terry: “the weak link.” See Sandra G. Boodman, Abortion Foes Strike At Doctors’ Home Lives; Illegal Intimidation or Protected Protest?, Wash. Post, Apr. 8, 1993, at Al. The enterprise has no respect for the law. See, e.g., Northeast Women’s Center, Inc. v. McMonagle, 745 F. Supp. 1082, 1094 (E.D. Pa.), modified, 749 F. Supp. 695 (E.D. Pa. 1990). Its flagrant disregard of court orders has resulted in numerous findings of contempt for Operation Rescue participants. See, e.g., Roe v. Opera- tion Rescue, 919 F.2d 857 (3d Cir. 1990); New York State NOW y. Terry, 886 F.2d 1339 (2d Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 947 (1990); NOW v. Operation Rescue, 747 F. Supp. 772 (D.D.C. 1990). It threatens to spin completely out of control if tighter reins are not applied. Accordingly, amici urge this Court to find that the “reprehensible activities” of the enterprise are com- pletely within the ambit of civil RICO and that economic motive has no place in the proper statutory construction of RICO. For the foregoing reasons, this Court should reverse the decision below of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 26 Respectfully submitted, ELAINE METLIN Counsel of Record NANCIE A. THOMAS 2101 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 828-2263 CELESTE LACY DAVIS EVE W. PAUL ROGER K. EVANS LEGAL ACTION FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. 810 Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10019 Attorneys for Amici Curiae --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385017_1130%3A25. Public record. Not legal advice.