The New Hampshire House has rejected HB 124, buffer zone repeal. An “inexpedient to legislate” motion passed 228-141.
Nine New Hampshire state representatives led by Kurt Wuelper (R-Strafford) are sponsoring HB 124, a bill to repeal the state’s so-called “buffer zone” law. That law is an anti-First-Amendment measure targeting peaceful pro-life witnesses outside abortion facilities. The public hearing on HB 124 is scheduled for Wednesday, January 9, in the House Judiciary Committee at 1:00 p.m. in room 208 of the Legislative Office Building in Concord.
The committee is scheduled to vote on a recommendation to the full House regarding the bill on January 15.
Options for registering your opinion on the bill:
- Attend the hearing. At that time you may deliver your testimony (speaking) to the committee, deliver written testimony with or without speaking, or simply sign the bill’s “blue sheet” (which will be available near the door of the committee room) to check off a box indicating support for the bill.
- Email the committee. The Judiciary Committee page on the House web site does not currently provide a committee address, but if you email chief sponsor Rep. Wuelper at firstname.lastname@example.org, he can forward your message to his colleagues. Subject line: YES on HB 124.
New Hampshire’s buffer zone law was passed in 2014, but has never been used. It authorizes abortion facility managers to determine where and when peaceful pro-life witnesses may occupy public property near abortion facilities. Maggie Hassan, then serving as Governor, signed the law despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court had only days before ruled a similar Massachusetts law to be unconstitutional (McCullen v. Coakley).
For background, you can consult the dedicated page compiling this blog’s reports on the buffer zone issue.
Text of HB 124 as introduced:
AN ACT repealing the law relative to the buffer zones to reproductive health care facilities.
1. Statement of Findings and Purpose.
I. The general court hereby finds that:
(a) The exercise of a person’s right to free speech is a First Amendment activity, the protection of which is paramount.
(b) RSA 132:37 through RSA 132:40 (2014, 81) would infringe on the free speech rights of innocent people.
(c) RSA 132:37 through RSA 132:40 (2014, 81), if implemented would be subject to immediate constitutional challenge.
(d) RSA 132:37 through RSA 132:40 (2014, 81) has served no public purpose.
II. Therefore, the general court hereby repeals RSA 132:37 through RSA 132:40 because if left as law, this statute will cause the state of New Hampshire to expend considerable sums defending a law which the United States Supreme Court may find unconstitutional and which has served no public purpose.
2 Repeal. RSA 132:37-132:40, relative to access to reproductive health care facilities, are repealed.
3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect upon its passage.