Joseph Scheidler, et al. v. National Organization for Women, Inc., et al. (547 U.S. 9)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 28, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 547 U.S. 9 · 126 S. Ct. 1264
- Decided
- February 28, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 8–0
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Privacy
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. A section of Title 18 of the United States Code (called the Hobbs Act) says that an individual commits a federal crime if he or she “obstructs, delays, or affects commerce” by (1) “robbery,” (2) “extortion,” or (3) “committing] or threatening] physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan.or purpose to do anything in violation of this section§ 1951(a) (emphasis added). The dispute in these cases concerns the meaning of the underscored words, in particular the words, “in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section.” Does this phrase refer to (violence committed pursuant to) those plans or purposes that affect interstate commerce through robbery or extortion? Or does it refer to (violence committed pursuant to) those plans or purposes that affect interstate commerce, plain and simple? If the former, the statute governs only a limited subset of violent behavior, namely, behavior connected with robbery and extortion. If the latter, the statute governs a far broader range of human activity, namely, all violent actions (against persons or property) that affect interstate commerce. In our view, the former, more restrictive reading of the Act is the correct interpretation. I Petitioners are individuals (and organizations) who engage in pro-life, anti-abortion protest activities.…
Excerpt of a 25,695-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.