The Minneapolis City Council has amended a 2022 ordinance prohibiting the obstruction of abortion clinic entrances and driveways, following a free-speech lawsuit filed by anti-abortion activists.
The amendment, approved earlier this month, now excludes constitutionally protected activities and maintains prohibitions on physically blocking clinic access.
Free-Speech Concerns Spark Lawsuit
The lawsuit was initiated by Pro-Life Action Ministries and three of its sidewalk counselors, who claimed the ordinance violated their First Amendment rights. The group argued that their activities — including offering literature and engaging in conversations with patients entering clinics — were peaceful and protected by the Constitution.
Brian Gibson, CEO of Pro-Life Action Ministries, described the amendment as an acknowledgment of their rights.
“They were accepting fault for having violated our constitutional rights,” Gibson said.
Minneapolis Ordinance History and Amendment
Enacted in 2022, the original ordinance was designed to protect patients at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Minneapolis’ Uptown neighborhood from interactions initiated by anti-abortion activists. Minneapolis was the only city in Minnesota with such a law.
The amendment, approved in a closed City Council session on December 5, added exemptions for “any person or group engaging in conduct protected by the United States Constitution, the Minnesota Constitution, or federal or Minnesota law.”
Despite the changes, the law continues to prohibit physically blocking clinic entrances, aligning it with the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act).
Reactions to the Decision
Aisha Chughtai, vice president of the Minneapolis City Council, emphasized the council’s dual commitment to protecting access to healthcare and safeguarding constitutional rights.
“We also want to be sure to provide very specific carveouts to ensure First Amendment rights are protected and ensure our local authority remains intact,” Chughtai stated.
Planned Parenthood North Central States, which was not involved in the lawsuit, expressed confidence that patient safety remains intact under the revised ordinance.
“Patients continue to be protected from people blocking or obstructing the driveway or sidewalk,” the organization said in a statement.
Broader Implications and Legal Fees
The Thomas More Society, a conservative legal group representing the plaintiffs, hailed the amendment as a “total victory for the free-speech folks.” The group is pursuing similar lawsuits nationwide, including cases in Florida, New York, California, and Illinois.
The plaintiffs are expected to seek reimbursement for legal fees, estimated at approximately $600,000.
