The buffer zone itself is a compromise—it is unnecessary and illogical to further compromise the safety of those seeking abortions by shrinking the buffer zone size to eight feet.

Martha M. Walz, president of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, described the buffer zone as small, explaining that the court-contested area is only “the last seven seconds of a patient’s or a staff member’s walk to the door.” Why would it be necessary to shrink these 35 feet any further, especially with such a history of violence and violation?

While many prefer to characterize all abortion protesters as innocent, 77-year-old grandmothers, the Anti-Defamation League has characterized anti-abortion violence as “America’s forgotten terrorism,” citing incidents in 2011 and 2012 involving Molotov cocktails that were thrown at clinics. The Guttmacher Institute reports that in 2008, among clinics that performed 400 or more abortions a year, 88 percent reported anti-abortion picketing. Thirty-seven percent reported anti-abortion picketing that involved physical contact with patients. This violation of safety and personal space is unacceptable.

The Supreme Court held in the 1994 case Madsen v. Women’s Health Center that “the First Amendment does not demand that patients at a medical facility undertake Herculean efforts to escape the cacophony of political protest.” Forty-one states, including Massachusetts, have passed restrictions on abortion.

As women’s reproductive rights remain under attack, women seeking abortions likely know the weight of their decisions when they arrive at clinics. The Guttmacher Institute reports that half of all abortion patients are between the ages of 15 and 24. It is time for us, as college students, to recognize the rights of our peers seeking abortions who should not be forced to endure verbal and physical attacks for their personal decisions.

Brianna J. Suslovic ’16