Hill v. Colorado

June 28, 2000

Nature of Case:

Challenge on First Amendment grounds to a Colorado statute that established an eight-foot "bubble zone" around anyone within 100 feet of a health care facility. This statute forbids individuals from knowingly approaching closer than eight feet another person who is within 100 feet of the entrance of a health care facility, without that person’s consent, in order to leaflet, display a sign, or engage in protest, education, or counseling.

Holding:

The Court ruled by a vote of 6-3 that the statute does not violate the First Amendment because it does not regulate speech on the basis of content or viewpoint. The court concluded that it was a reasonable time, place and manner restriction that left open ample alternative means of communication— (1) the eight-foot distance of separation required by the statute would not adversely affect the regulated speech because this is a normal conversational distance (2) the statute only bans “approaches," therefore protestors are not liable if they stand still and others come within eight feet of them (3) the protestor must “knowingly" approach, and the “knowingly" requirement protects against accidentally or unavoidably coming within eight feet of someone who is in motion. The court also addressed the question of the legitimacy of the state’s interest in enacting this type of restriction and found the state’s interest in protecting the unwilling listener from persistent and dogged intrusions, particularly in situations that the listener cannot choose to avoid, to be legitimate.