Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

The subcommines met at 10 am. II 2002 LENDLET House Office Briting. Bor. Dor Lowards charmat of the subcommittee presiding

Present: Representatives Lowers Corvers. Schroeder. Schumer. Sensenbrenner. De Wine and Dannemeyer

Staff present: Catherine A Deny chef counsel James I. Demp sey, assistant counsel and Pring & EleD. ASSOCIATE Counsel. Mr. EDWARDS. The subcommimes will come to order

Today we re going to begin a series of bearings on abortion clinic violence. Our purpose is to consider whether specific instances. unlawful activities cremed against abortion clinics have infringed constitutional rights of reproductive freedom.

The purpose of these hearings is most emphatically not to debate the pros and cons of abortion. We take as our premise the bolting of the Supreme Court which has ruled that abortion in the earlier stages of a pregnancy is a fundamental right.

We have reserved reports about clinic entrances being blocked. clinics being invaded to disrupt activities, telephone threats, property damage and so on. We strongly condemn all forms of violence that infringe the exercise of constitutional rights. The purpose of these hearings is to explore the scope and impact of this problem. We also want to ask whether the Federal Government, and particularly the Department of Justice, should be involved in investigating such violence under the civil rights laws.

We will receive testimony in a later session from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regarding its investigation of the bombings and arsons. We applaud their successes to date and we urge them to continue their efforts until each of the bombings is solved.

The hearing today focuses on other forms of violence, the harassment and intimidation of patients and staff, that may be equally as injurious in discouraging the exercise of constitutional rights. I should make it clear that we fully support the exercise of first amendment rights by abortion opponents. The allegations that we will be investigating here go far beyond legitimate first amendment protests.

To date, the role of the Federal Government in prosecuting clinic violence, apart from the bombings, has been limited or nonexistent.

The Justice Department has available to it a statute making it a Federal crime to interfere with the exercise of a constitutional right. Reproductive freedoms are constitutionally protected, yet the Justice Department has not intervened here.

In the past the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department has acted, for example, to prosecute harassment of blacks exercising their right to enter a restaurant. At a later session we will be asking why the same law is not being applied to violence against women exercising their rights to enter reproductive health centers. The gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I welcome the opportunity to make an opening statement here this morning,

Before I make my statement, let me ask unanimous consent that this hearing may be broadcast, filmed or telecast in whole or in part, pursuant to committee rule 5.

Mr. EDWARDS. Without objection so ordered.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I am a member of this subcommittee that has a 100-percent prolife voting record and am proud of it. On the other hand, I deplore, in as strong as possible terms as I can, the illegal acts such as bombings and arsons that have occurred in abortion clinics throughout the country.

I believe that these acts have been committed by a few demented individuals who, while well intentioned, have decided to take the law into their own hands, and wrongly so. These illegal activities are jeopardizing the prolife movement in the country and in the Congress and hurting the chances of passing the human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which is the ultimate goal of the prolife movement.

I would hope that those who do not share the values of the prolife movement would not use the acts of a few demented individuals to attempt to discredit an entire movement. I think that would be 1980 style McCarthyism and should be condemned as vigorously as the McCarthyism that this country experienced in the 1950's.

On the other hand I think we ought to be very careful in drawing a line between those that commit illegal acts like bombings and arsons and those that are exercising their first amendment rights to express themselves on what is a legitimate political and social issue facing this Congress and facing this country.

On January 26, 1985, the Cleveland Plain Dealer ran an op-ed piece by Mr. Benson A. Wolman, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio. I rarely quote writings and statements of ACLU agencies with approval, but I intend to do so today. And I would just like to read one paragraph of Mr. Wolman's article.

It said:

Nevertheless, there is too much a tendency to over-attribute to social movements and messages the acts of deviants. Those of us who place a high regard on personal chance ought to make sure that pressures do not mount to make the pro-life commumity accountable for the misguided acts of borderline personalities who respond in violent rage

So, picketing and freedom of expression on the abortion issue, I think, is something that ought to be defended and ought to be con

and pickering during the ant-war movements of the 1960's wHE And I would hope that despite the fact that there have been some instances which al responsing peope depiore regardless of ther opinions on whether abortior should be egalized we shout no at tempt to use the broat brust I say that everyone v proie condones these acts of violence, because we do not

Thank you.

Mr. EDWARDS The gentleman from Michigan. Mr Convert.
Mr. CONTERS 1 dor i have anything ve

Mr. EDWARDS. The gentlewomar from Colorad

Mrs. SCHROEDER I thank the chairman and I want u compli ment him on calling these hearings

I think this is a very, very critical issue because if you read the United States Code, it seVE I # & Federal crime for TWD or more persons to conspire to threater or intimidate ary citizer in the free exercise of any right or privilege secured to them by the Constitution or laws of the Unner States

That is what we are talking about We are not talking about groups exercising their free speech rights. Of course we want them to be able to exercise their free speect rige. But we don't want them going further and intimidating people wht are exercising their rights guaranteed under the law.

We remember that symbol of justice in this country the blindfolded woman holding the scale And that is what we will be doing. I think, by these bearings, is looking at that scale and making sure those things are in balance. No one wants to stop free speect but no one should be given the right to harass people, intimidate people who are just doing something that is perfectly legal. That is a Federal crime according to our code.

And my real question is. Why has the Federal Government not seen it in this manner? I think that is a great gap in justice, and I will be very interested to understand why there has been such selective enforcement on this matter.

I appreciate the position the witnesses are in. This is a very diff cult thing for people to come forward and talk about. And I understand how sensitive it is. We honor and respect what you are doing. because for every one of you there are many other people who have been affected by this, and they, too, appreciate your courage in coming forward and talking to us today.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Conyers.

Mr. CONYERS. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to welcome the witnesses and express a point made by the gentlewoman from Colorado.

I think the reason these hearings are being held, and I haven't discussed this personally with the chairman, is that there is a law against blowing up people and blowing up buildings. And that has nothing, whatsoever, to do with the first amendment or the right to free speech. I am also, I would say to the gentlewoman, very inter ested in finding out what the devil the law enforcement agencies have been doing about this, because, to my mind, they've been

[graphic]

ABORTION CLINIC VIOLENCE

OVERSIGHT HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON

CIVIL AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST AND SECOND SESSION

ON

ABORTION CLINIC VIOLENCE

MARCH 6, 12, AND APRIL 3, 1985; AND DECEMBER 17, 1986

Serial No. 115

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

[graphic]
« AnteriorContinuar »