|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Oregon jury rules against anti-abortion web site
Defendants ordered to pay $107 million in damages
By Kate Randall
4 February 1999
On Tuesday a federal jury in Portland, Oregon ordered anti-abortion
defendants to pay more than $107 million to Planned Parenthood
and a group of doctors in an abortion rights suit. The 14 defendants
include 12 individuals and the organizations American Coalition
of Life Activists and Advocates for Life Ministries. They are
responsible for producing "wanted" posters of abortion
providers and an anti-abortion web site that lists the names and
provides detailed information of doctors who perform abortions.
The case was brought in 1995 under federal racketeering statutes
and the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994, which
makes it illegal to use "force or threat of force" against
anyone seeking or providing an abortion. Originally citing the
"Deadly Dozen" posters, which offered cash rewards for
information about certain doctors, the suit was later expanded
to include "The Nuremberg Files" web site.
In closing arguments in the three-week trial, Maria Vullo,
a lawyer for the plaintiffs, commented on the defendants' activities:
"It's about using tactics to intimidate so these doctors
will stop performing abortions because they are afraid that just
like other doctors who have been murdered, it will happen to them....
Remember the pattern: Poster, murder. Poster, murder. Poster,
murder."
Doctors testified during the trial that they have lived in
constant fear since their names appeared on the site. They have
taken to wearing bulletproof vests and disguises and constantly
changing their routes to work in an effort to evade would-be assassins.
Over the past two decades, there have been more than 250 acts
of violence in the US, including bombings, against clinics providing
abortions. Seven people have been killed in the past five years.
At the center of the trial was the content of "The Nuremberg
Files" web site. Created by Georgia computer consultant Neal
Horsley three years ago, it takes its name from the German city
where Nazi leaders were tried after World War II. Under the heading
"Visualize Abortionists on Trial," the site describes
itself as "a coalition of concerned citizens throughout the
USA [that] is cooperating in collecting dossiers on abortionists
in anticipation that one day we may be able to hold them on trial
for crimes against humanity."
Information on the site amounts to a hit list of doctors and
others assisting in providing abortions for women, which has been
legal since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision of 1973. The
site's "Main Archive" lists the names of doctors on
whom personal data is being accumulated. When a doctor is wounded
his name is grayed out. When a doctor is slain, a line appears
through his or her name. One such name on the site is that of
Barnett Slepian, the upstate New York doctor who was killed by
a sniper's bullet through his kitchen window on October 23, 1998.
Visitors to the site are urged to e-mail information on doctors,
nurses, abortion clinic owners and directors, and security guards
and escorts at clinics. Information is also sought on "judges
and politicians who pass or uphold laws authorizing child-killing
or oppressing pro-life activists." Data sought includes the
following:
- "Photos or video tapes of the abortionist, their car,
their house, friends, and anything else of interest";
- "Current and past personal data including date and place
of birth, home and business addresses and phone numbers, Social
Security numbers, automobile plate numbers, names and birthdates
of spouse(s), children and friends";
- Criminal records, mug shots, divorce files, newspaper clippings
and "anything else you believe will help identify and convict
the abortionist in a future court of law."
The site includes a lurid exhibit purporting to tell "The
Hard, Dirty, Stinking, Terrifying Truth About Legalized Abortion."
A series of photos, supposedly taken undercover by a Nuremberg
Files supporter, depicts plastic jars at a "laboratory in
Southern California." According to the accompanying text:
"Each of those plastic jars contains one little dead person.
The mother's name and the date of the abortion are written on
the labels."
The narrative continues: "Look closely and you can make
out the names of the mothers as well as some of the actual body
parts of the children they sacrificed on the altar of the demon
of self-indulgence." A number of the women's names are clearly
legible.
This section of the site ends with the words, in bold: "Is
it any wonder people are driven to violence in the face of such
injustice, such evil, such abomination?"
The jury in the Portland trial did not have the option of shutting
down the site, and could only decide on damages. Plaintiffs' attorneys
have asked presiding US District Judge Robert E. Jones to order
its closure. They are seeking a temporary injunction against the
site while Jones rules on whether it should be shut down permanently,
or its contents altered.
The defendants in the case will appeal the trial's decision
and argue that the site should remain open during the appeal process.
A number of the defendants said they had taken steps to make themselves
"judgment proof" by transferring their assets.
One of the defendants is Michael Bray, a minister from Bowie,
Maryland, who was jailed for close to four years for bombing and
setting fire to seven abortion clinics in the 1980s. He denounced
the verdict as a blow against First Amendment rights.
Bray organized a banquet in College Park, Maryland on January
21 to mark the twenty-sixth anniversary of the Supreme Court decision
legalizing abortion. The banquet was a benefit to raise money
for families of people imprisoned for anti-abortion crimes. Bray
defended the tactics, including bombings and murders, which led
to jail sentences for many in attendance. "I would call it
the use of force to defend the innocent in the womb," he
said.
Pro-choice groups have welcomed the Portland jury's ruling
as a defense of a woman's right to abortion. These rights have
come under increasing attack in recent years. In 1992 the Supreme
Court ruled that abortion rights did not have to meet the "strict
scrutiny" standard of review usually applied to protect fundamental
rights. This means that states are permitted to impose restrictions
on abortion rights as long as they do not "unduly burden"
a woman's right to choose.
In 1998, state governments in the US enforced more abortion
restrictions that at any time since the Roe v. Wade decision.
According to the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action
League (NARAL), more than 300 anti-choice bills have been introduced
since January 1998, and more than 50 such measures in 23 states
were enacted in the first half of 1998 alone.
These restrictions include mandatory waiting periods, Medicaid
funding bans, parental consent and notification laws, bans on
the use of public facilities for abortion, bans on specific procedures,
and prohibitions on the use of public funds to counsel women about
or provide referrals for abortion services.
NARAL says that although attention is focused on so-called
"partial-birth" abortion, "the vast majority of
bills passed by state legislatures impeded access to reproductive
health services on other fronts." In June 1998 the Senate
voted to deny access to abortion for women in the US military
at military hospitals, even if they pay for the procedure themselves.
In May of last year doctors in Wisconsin notified patients that
they would no longer perform abortions at any stage of pregnancy,
fearing prosecution under a vaguely worded law banning "partial
birth" abortions. Doctors who violate the law face life sentences.
Thirty-one states enacted anti-choice legislation in 1997,
and in 84 percent of counties across the United States there is
no abortion provider. The states of North Dakota and South Dakota
have only one abortion provider each, burdening women with travel
expenses and hardship, or putting an abortion procedure out of
their reach.
The day after the Portland verdict, a woman in San Francisco
gave birth to a baby girl. Twenty-one-year-old Yuriko Kawaguchi
was convicted of credit card fraud, and sentenced in October 1998
to six months in prison for an offense which would usually receive
probation. At her trial in Cleveland, Ohio Kawaguchi pleaded guilty
and told Judge Patricia Cleary that she had an "unwanted
pregnancy" and would be "trying to have a procedure."
At her sentencing hearing, Cleary remarked, "She is not having
a second-term abortion," and gave her a sentence to ensure
that she wouldn't. Ms. Kawaguchi is suing Judge Cleary.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |