Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Abortion Protestors Wielding a New Weapon: A Camera
Aired May 29, 2002 - 07:43 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: There is nothing very funny about this candid camera. Abortion protestors are wielding a new weapon, a camera, and it is aimed directly at the women who get abortions. And as you might expect, the subjects of these snapshots aren't very happy about this, and some of them are talking about suing.
Here is CNN's Anne McDermott.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNE MCDERMOTT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They used to just yell at each other about abortion, but it got a lot worse. Now, another tactic, anti-abortion sites on the Internet. Actually they have been around for a while, and some of them name names of abortion doctors and characterize them as killers. What's new are sites like Neal Horsley's abortioncams.com. He puts up photos of women entering abortion clinics, all in an effort to shame them.
NEAL HORSLEY, ANTI-ABORTION ACTIVIST: Because people know that go there to kill their babies that what they are doing is a shameful thing, the knowledge of that shameful act is sufficient to cause many of them to change their mind when they realize that they are going to be exposed through our news coverage.
MCDERMOTT: Abortion rights activists say this is not right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is obviously an egregious violation of our privacy rights.
MCDERMOTT: Is it? If the photos are taken in public places, it's not illegal, but a First Amendment attorney says what you do with the photos may make the difference.
DOUG MIRELL, ATTORNEY: Is this more like intimidation, political intimidation as it were? Or is it a true threat?
MCDERMOTT: Horsley says he doesn't want to see anyone harmed, but he does want to see them in jail.
HORSLEY: Absolutely. I think that people who commit homicide are deserving of criminal punishment.
MCDERMOTT: Abortion doctors have been killed, nurses have been wounded, and some people do feel threatened, like Los Angeles attorney, Gloria Allred. She made one list apparently simply because she describes herself as pro-choice, and she is a little worried.
GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: Because there are people who are extremists, who think that the best way to support life is to kill.
MCDERMOTT: But she says having her name on a Web site won't stop her, and abortion clinics have adopted evermore creative ways of shielding their patients from anti-abortion paparazzi. But Horsley says he will keep his site up and running as long as abortions are legal.
Anne McDermott, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And joining us now to offer his perspective on whether this candid camera action crosses the legal line is CNN legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin.
Good morning.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi.
ZAHN: All right. I think what we need to recognize going into this is there are millions of Americans who think women who go into these abortion clinics are murderers. All right?
TOOBIN: That is a political point of view widely held in this country.
ZAHN: So help us understand when the intimidation becomes threatening.
TOOBIN: Well, the question is not whether people have the right to protest against abortion. Clearly they do. And the question is there is a new federal law that says you cannot make threats against people who are entering abortion clinics.
So the legal system is struggling with the issue of when political speech, which is protected and allowed and encouraged, becomes a threat that is illegal. And the courts have had a terribly difficult time drawing that line. Let me just give you a quick example.
ZAHN: Sure.
TOOBIN: In Oregon, some Planned Parenthood doctors sued an abortion Web site for putting up doctors' pictures with wanted-styled posters. The court that tried the case ruled for the doctors. The first appeals court reversed it, saying, no, that was free speech. It was appealed again, and here -- I brought a prop -- by six votes to five, the full appeals court said that, no, the abortion doctors were right that it was intimidation. And look at these opinions. Look at how long it took the judges to make up their mind. I mean, they couldn't really come up with a clear line between speech and intimidation. ZAHN: But they did in the 6-5 decision they made ultimately. So what does that mean for these women who find themselves photographed, and they see themselves on this Web site? Could they argue then that they become target No. 1 for a potential shooter out there?
TOOBIN: They could argue that. Based on this decision, I don't think so. I mean, I don't think they would win, because it is true that these people are on public property, who are taking the photographs. I think they are far better off doing the self-help, putting -- you know, carrying umbrellas, putting up curtains, you know, staying out of the photographs if they possibly can, because I do think that these photographs by and large are free speech as long as there is no call to injure, attack or hurt these women in any way. But that doesn't make them feel any better.
ZAHN: Do we have any idea of how effective this campaign is?
TOOBIN: Well, it's not all that widespread yet. I mean, when you think about the many, many abortion clinics in the country, there are only a handful of abortion clinics where this has started. But it is obviously something that's growing.
And the Internet changes things dramatically, because instead of just putting up wanted posters, which is what had been done in the past, and several doctors who had wanted posters put up about them were later killed, which was very important to this court. No abortion women have been killed yet, and I think that's a key factor in why the courts have allowed it so far.
ZAHN: And I guess you wonder the shame these women feel finding themselves photographed if that ultimately impacts the decision they might make, whether or not to go through with an abortion.
TOOBIN: But shame is not something that the first -- I mean, the First Amendment doesn't protect you from shame. I mean, you can't sue to stop from feeling shame. You can stop from being intimidated.
ZAHN: Sure.
TOOBIN: But shame is not enough to get a court to stop these kinds of protests.
ZAHN: Fascinating. Thank you for bringing it to our attention this morning. Jeffrey Toobin, go off and have a good day.
TOOBIN: All right.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.
