Anti-abortion protester not bound by abortion clinic protest injunction

This case concerns when a federal injunction applies to anyone who was not part of the lawsuit that produced the injunction in the first place. The injunction involved the rights of abortion protesters. The Court of Appeals finds that a man can protest outside an abortion facility even though an injunction prohibited other protesters from doing so.

The case is Havens v. James, issued on August 4. In 2005, Judge Arcara of the Western District of New York issued an injunction that prohibited certain defendants from protesting within 15 feet of the entrance to any abortion clinic in the Western District. Nor can they aid and abet other protesters who want to protest within 15 feet of the clinics. This is known as the "Arcara injunction."

Enter Jim Havens, an anti-abortion activist who wants to protest outside a Planned Parenthood facility in Rochester, within the Western District. The district court enjoined Havens from holding these protests, on the basis that the Arcara injunction said he cannot do so. The Court of Appeals (Menashi and Nardini) reverses.

How can the Court of Appeals reverse in light of the Arcara injunction? Because that injunction did not involve Havens. It involved other people. The Court of Appeals uses this case "to clarify the circumstances in which an injunction may be applied to someone who is not a party to the injunction." The Court notes that "We have long recognized that “no court can make a decree which will bind any one but a party” because a court’s “jurisdiction is limited to those over whom it gets personal service, and who therefore can have their day in court.” Judge Learned Hand said that in 1930. As such, "The principle that 'everyone should have his own day in court' is 'fundamental' and 'part of our deep-rooted historic tradition.'” The Supreme Court said that in 1996.

In this case, the Arcara injunction cannot be enforced against Havens. Nor can the Second Circuit majority find any evidence that anyone had aided-or-abetted Havens in his anti-abortion activism. The district court ruling is therefore vacated. For now, until someone obtains an injunction against Havens, he can protest outside the Planned Parenthood facility. 

In dissent, Judge Lohier argues that there is in fact evidence of aiding-and-abetting: 

As the District Court noted, Havens admits in his complaint to conducting training sessions at Focus Pregnancy Help Center, which is run by its founder, Mary Jost, another anti-abortion protestor who is a named party to the injunction. Jost and Focus were not shy about their association with Havens and his followers. For example, Havens’s complaint specifically mentions the “Focus Pregnancy Help Center’s website promoting a Jim Havens and Sidewalk Advocates for Life protest outside Planned Parenthood on University Avenue."