IJR News — today's news from every side
Nicole Hardy Doctors already face tough situations but fining people over feelings rather than actions sets a bad precedent that could expand to other issues.
Dana Whitfield Doctors earn plenty yet so many I see live paycheck to paycheck with new cars every few years.Derek Foss Fining pro-lifers for their activism while ignoring the other side's tactics feels like a one-sided attack on free expression.
Nicole Hardy Doctors need safety from threats but fining people over emotional claims opens the door to shutting down all pro-life speech.Tom Gallagher Protesters should not face penalties for expressing views on abortion just because it upsets the people performing the procedures.Jared Kim Doctors already have legal protections against real threats, so expanding this to vague emotional claims just targets dissent on abortion.Sam Okafor Protesting abortion should not become illegal just because it upsets doctors who choose that work.Jared Kim Making activism illegal through vague emotional harm rules sets a bad precedent that could target any group the state dislikes.Elena Vasquez It sets a bad precedent when lawmakers decide that only one side of a debate gets legal protection from criticism.Priya Raman New Jersey should not be redefining peaceful sidewalk counseling as illegal harm when the first amendment protects that speech.Jared Kim It is unfair to give abortion providers special protection from criticism while ignoring the emotional side of the issue for others.Marcus Bell Doctors in this field should expect strong opinions without shifting costs onto activists through new laws.Dana Whitfield It could criminalize expressing pro-life views in New Jersey, which undermines basic rights to speak out.Elena Vasquez Targeting only one side with fines for activism ignores how both sides express strong views on this issue.
