This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Supreme Court has just missed an opportunity to fix American law and precedent on speech limits that are in place around the topic of abortion.
That's according to Justice Clarence Thomas, who warned that the limit established by the court in Hill v. Colorado years ago is nothing more or less than a content-based restriction, which is unconstitutional.
The Washington Examiner explained the failure came in the court's decision not to hear arguments in a new case.
In the Hill case, the court affirmed the leftist state of Colorado's imposition of "buffer zones" around abortion businesses, where pro-life Americans' free speech can be criminal.
"The court today declines an invitation to set the record straight on Hill's defunct status," he explained in a dissent.
He said the Hill result "contradicted more than a half-century of well-established First Amendment principles."
The new case was Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale which came out of Carbondale, Illinois.
There officials imposed a draconian law barring protesters from approaching within eight feet of people near abortion businesses without consent.
Thomas explained the Carbondale ordinance and others like it, the report said, are nothing other than content-based restrictions on speech.
Carbondale just months ago repealed the ordinance, but Thomas said that damage already was done by the months the First Amendment violation was in place.
Justice Samuel Alito also said the new case should be heard.
The majority decision, however, leaves in place, Thomas said, confusion in lower courts about what the law should be.
Coalition Life, a group of sidewalk counselors, said it will continue to fight the free speech limits in Hill.
"The Supreme Court has denied our appeal, but we will not be denied the ability to perform our lifesaving work on the sidewalk," said Brian Westbrook, of Coalition Life. "Sidewalk counselors will continue to show up for the women who need us every single day, in every place we are called…as we expand our operations across the United States, we will continue to advocate for these women and our fundamental right to speak with them to offer help, hope and information that they desperately need."
Peter Breen, of the Thomas More Society, which fought on behalf of the pro-lifers, said city officials "quietly repealed its bubble zone ordinance in a shadowy, four-minute, weekend meeting, knowing full well their bubble zone would fail constitutional scrutiny if it came before the Supreme Court."
