Thomas More Society secures judgment of liability against County in lawsuit against pro-abortion law.
Note: This story comes from the Thomas More Society
A federal court has ruled that Westchester County, New York, violated the First Amendment rights of pro-life sidewalk counselors, marking a significant victory for free speech in a legal challenge brought by Thomas More Society attorneys. The decision in Hulinsky v. County of Westchester found the County liable for enacting an unconstitutional provision in its 2022 “Reproductive Health Care Facilities Access Act,” or Chapter 425, which restricted peaceful pro-life advocacy near abortion facilities.
The decision awards plaintiffs Oksana Hulinsky and Regina Molinelli $1 for the chilling of their life-saving sidewalk counseling for over two-and-half years as a result of the unconstitutional law, even though the County attempted to avoid liability by repealing the offending provision earlier this year.
This ruling builds on a March 14 decision that rejected the County’s attempt to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims against part of Chapter 425 prohibiting so-called “interference” with abortion access “by deceptive means or otherwise”—a sweeping and unprecedented restriction adopted as part of the County’s furor over the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs. The Court rightly held the provision “criminalized large swaths of protected speech” on pain of jail, fines, and civil liability, flagrantly violating the First Amendment.
“This ruling sends a powerful message to municipalities nationwide: vague laws targeting pro-life speech will not stand,” said Christopher Ferrara, Senior Counsel at Thomas More Society. “Westchester County’s pro-life sidewalk counselors seek only to offer compassionate, life-affirming alternatives on public sidewalks—as is their First Amendment right. Westchester’s arrogant overreach tried to silence their voices, but this decision helps reaffirm their constitutional freedom to share the pro-life message.”
Hulinsky v. County of Westchester was filed by Thomas More Society attorneys in August 2022 after the County enacted Chapter 425, which imposed a litany of severe restrictions on speech and assembly near abortion facilities, intending to restrict pro-life sidewalk counseling ministries in public spaces. The County has since repealed or amended a number of those provisions in response to the Thomas More Society lawsuit. But the latest decision ensures that Westchester County must pay nominal damages and potentially significant attorney fees for violating Plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights for nearly three years.
“Nobody should be sent to jail and forced to pay significant fines simply for handing out pro-life leaflets and talking peacefully to women about abortion alternatives on public sidewalks,” said Michael McHale, Senior Counsel at Thomas More Society. “Yet, Westchester County’s vague ban on so-called ‘interference’ with abortion access threatened to do exactly that, in blatant violation of the First Amendment, as the Court recognized.”
However, Thomas More Society intends to appeal the Court’s prior decision upholding Chapter 425’s prohibition on “following-and-harassing,” which the law vaguely defines as ignoring an “implied request to cease” on a public sidewalk.
“This decision sets a precedent that rogue governments may not recklessly trample on the fundamental rights of peaceful pro-life sidewalk counselors and then attempt to run and hide at the first sign of an adverse court judgment—a common tactic wielded against pro-lifers,” McHale said. “We look forward to pursuing significant attorney fees against Westchester County for violating our clients’ rights and in continuing to eradicate similarly unconstitutional restrictions on pro-life speech in courts across the country.”
The opinion from U.S. District Court Judge Philip Halperin reads in part, Plaintiffs are both pro-life “advocates.” Consistent with their beliefs, they have engaged in “sidewalk counseling.” This practice includes approaching individuals leaving or entering a reproductive health care facility and engaging them in an “exchange [of] ideas,” “opinions,” and “information” about alternatives to abortion.
Plaintiffs assert that the challenged provisions, for the purpose of this Opinion and Order
limited to Section 425.31(h), in Chapter 425 have caused them to cease their sidewalk counseling.
First, both Plaintiffs testified during their depositions that they regularly engaged in “sidewalk counseling” in front of abortion clinics but stopped after the passage of Chapter 425.
Accordingly, in light of this well-established rule and the Court’s prior rulings in the Summary Judgment Opinion, the Court finds that Defendant is liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating Plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights to free speech and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process. Thus, Plaintiffs are entitled to damages.
Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment in their favor
that the 2022 version of Section 425.31(h) violated their constitutional rights; and determines further that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of one dollar ($1.00) in nominal damages.
Because the Court also finds that Plaintiffs are “prevailing parties” within the meaning of
42 U.S.C. § 1988, they are directed to file their application for attorneys’ fees and costs, including supporting records, within 30 days of the date of this Order. Defendant’s opposition, if any, shall be filed within 14 days of the filing of Plaintiffs’ fee application.
Philip M. Halpern, United States District Judge
Westchester County has the right to appeal the decision.
