Earlier this month, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that a group of abortion protesters did not have standing to challenge a New Hampshire buffer zone law.  The First Circuit’s decision affirmed a decision by the federal district court, which we reported on last summer.

The law in question prohibited protesters from entering within 25 feet of the entrance to a reproductive health care facility.  Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in McCullen v. Coakley, enforcement of the New Hampshire law was stayed.  A group of protesters filed suit anyway, but the district court found that the plaintiffs had suffered no injury since the law had not been enforced and was not likely to be enforced against them.

The First Circuit agreed with the district court that, because injury was not imminent, the group of protesters lacked standing.  The appeals court also held that the challenge was not ripe, as the court could not meaningfully decide the case and there was no prejudice to the plaintiffs if they were required to wait until their claims ripen.

Reddy v. Foster, ___ F.3d ___, 2017 WL 104825 (1st Cir. Jan. 11, 2017).

Print:
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn
Photo of Brian J. Connolly Brian J. Connolly

Brian Connolly represents public- and private-sector clients in matters relating to zoning, planning, development entitlements and other complex regulatory issues.  Brian’s practice encompasses a broad range of land use matters including zoning compliance, rezonings and other regulatory amendments, planned-unit developments, development agreements, private covenants and restrictions, land use and zoning litigation, initiatives and referenda associated with land use approvals, and real estate transactions.  Brian additionally specializes in the First Amendment and land use issues associated with outdoor sign and advertising regulation, and fair housing matters in local planning and zoning.