| Opinion [ Rehnquist ] | Other [ Stevens ] | Other [ Scalia ] | Concurrence [ Souter ] | Syllabus |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HTML version WordPerfect version | HTML version WordPerfect version | HTML version WordPerfect version | HTML version WordPerfect version | HTML version WordPerfect version |
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No.
JUDY MADSEN, et al., PETITIONERS v. WOMEN'S HEALTH CENTER, INC., et al.
on writ of certiorari to the supreme court of florida
[
Justice
I join the Court's opinion and write separately only to clarify two matters in the record. First, the trial judge made reasonably clear that the issue of who was acting "in concert" with the named defendants was a matter to be taken up in individual cases, and not to be decided on the basis of protesters' viewpoints. See Tr. 40, 43, 93, 115, 119-120 (Apr. 12, 1993, Hearing). Second, petitioners themselves acknowledge that the governmental interests in protection of public safety and order, of the free flow of traffic, and of property rights are reflected in Florida law. See Brief for Petitioners 17, and n. 7 (citing, e.g., Fla. Stat. §§870.041-870.047 (1991) (public peace); Fla. Stat. §316.2045 (1991) (obstruction of public streets, highways, and roads)).