The Massachusetts Catholic Conference praised Monday’s court ruling which temporarily removes so-called "buffer zones" around the state’s abortion clinics. The MCC issued a statement Tuesday commending U.S. District Court Judge Edward F. Harrington for recognizing "the critical free speech problems of the law restricting pro-life speech in front of abortion facilities."

"Those working on behalf of abortion providers to shuttle women in for abortions were exempted from the law’s reach while pro-lifers attempting to persuade women to change their minds were subject to threats of fines and imprisonment. This is unfair and unconstitutional," Daniel Avila, associate director for public policy of the Mass. Catholic Conference, said in a statement.

Judge Harrington ruled the "buffer zone" legislation, which prohibits protesters or sidewalk counselors from approaching individuals entering an abortion clinic, unconstitutional and voided the law pending the outcome of a hearing on a lawsuit challenging the unconstitutionality of buffer zones.

The 13-day-old law, similar to the Colorado "bubble zone" statute which was upheld in a June 26 U.S. Supreme Court decision, placed a six foot protective bubble around individuals on foot or in vehicles within 18 feet of an abortion clinic. Protesters or sidewalk counselors breaching the protective bubble without an individual’s consent faced a first-time penalty of six months in jail and a maximum fine of $1,000.

The judge decided the buffer zone discriminated against abortion protesters and sidewalk counselors who were forced to obey the buffer zone while abortion clinic employees and volunteers could escort patients without impediment.

"Pro-life advocates who firmly believe that abortion remains a grave moral evil must be given as equal an opportunity as their opponents to express … their sincere message of respect for the sanctity of innocent human life," he wrote. "The First Amendment requires no less."

Laurie Letourneau, one of the sidewalk counselors outside the Worcester Planned Parenthood site, 631 Lincoln St., said the white chalk lines police drew around the clinic when the buffer zone law took effect Nov. 11 made her feel "very degraded, like a second class citizen."

Mrs. Letourneau, chairman of Life Action League of Massachusetts, explained that aside from some initial controversy, the buffer zone "did not impact us a whole lot." However, she noted, the removal of the buffer zone will make communicating with individual’s in automobiles easier.

Roderick P. Murphy, chairman of the board at Problem Pregnancy of Worcester, said he questioned the fairness of the legislation during its two or three years of development.

Mr. Murphy wondered how the law could be deemed constitutional when it picked out and separated a group of people for their beliefs. Even groups supporting abortion rights such as the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts opposed the buffer zone legislation, he noted.

"This time, the judge actually agrees with us," Mr. Murphy said, adding that the courts often rule in favor of those supporting abortion rights.

Philip D. Moran, president of the Pro Life Legal Defense Fund, agrees. "Rarely in abortion cases does one see a judge enforce the Constitution, as it was written and interpreted until 1973," Mr. Moran said in a statement Tuesday.

Calling the buffer zone legislation "patently discriminatory," he stated that Judge Harrington did what he took his oath of office to do, "decide cases agreeable to the Constitution and laws of the United States."

Judge Harrington’s decision surprised the bill backers, who said the state Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the bill after being asked for an advisory option by the Senate. Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly reportedly planned to appeal the judge’s ruling.

Calls to the Worcester Planned Parenthood office were not returned, but the Associated Press reported that Diane Luby, president of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, was disturbed by the language in Judge Harrington’s decision. Ms. Luby said she felt the judge ruled based on his own views, not the merits of the law.

Melissa Kogut, head of the Massachusetts office of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League told AP that she believes the legislation will eventually be deemed constitutional.

Mr. Murphy feels confident that the Judge Harrington’s decision will be upheld. "I can’t see how it would be overturned," he said.

The ruling invalidates the Massachusetts law that recently took effect and required abortion protesters to stand back from abortion clinics and their clients.

The right to free speech is a precious one and Judge Edward F. Harrington recognizes that taking it away from one segment of the population is wrong.

Why is it that when you have a message of truth some people work hard at silencing it? Cover their eyes, cover their ears or they might hear and see a message of love and respect, an offer of help, a way to prevent the tragedy of abortion. The cry that the buffer zone was a public safety issue was a sham - we all know that. And now, thankfully, a judge has taken the side of the protected right to free speech.

How ludicrous of the supporters of abortion to say they wanted to prevent violence by establishing the buffer zone when that is just how they earn their money - by doing violence to the unborn.

The ruling will in all likelihood be challenged since the U.S. Supreme Court and our own state Supreme Judicial Court have given favorable opinions on buffer zones. The outcome is predictable.