Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (2006)

Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (NOW) (2006) was a landmark Supreme Court case concerning the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and its application to anti-abortion protesters. The case, initiated in 1986 by NOW, alleged that Joseph Scheidler and other anti-abortion activists engaged in a nationwide conspiracy to shut down abortion clinics through violence and intimidation, thereby violating RICO by interfering with interstate commerce.

The central legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the defendants' actions constituted extortion as defined by RICO, particularly whether they obtained "property" from the abortion clinics. NOW argued that the defendants extorted property by depriving the clinics of their ability to conduct business and by interfering with their economic opportunities.

The case went before the Supreme Court multiple times. In NOW v. Scheidler (1994), the Court ruled that RICO could apply to non-economic, politically motivated conduct. However, in Scheidler v. NOW (2003), the Court held that RICO requires the obtaining of "property" from the victim, a condition not met by the disruption of services alone.

The final ruling in Scheidler v. NOW (2006) addressed remaining claims of property extortion. The Supreme Court unanimously held that the anti-abortion activists did not violate RICO because they did not obtain property from the clinics in the sense required by the statute. The Court reasoned that the defendants did not acquire anything of value from the clinics; they merely interfered with the clinics' ability to conduct business. This decision effectively ended NOW's long-running RICO lawsuit against Scheidler and the other anti-abortion activists. The case is significant for its interpretation of RICO and its impact on the application of the statute to politically motivated protests and activism.