The American Spectator

Well, journalism school may be part of the problem, not the solution, but journalists need to learn even a semblance of objectivity somewhere.

Abortion stories are usually the worst, and the Associated Press meets and surpasses the expectations today in reporting on the Scheidler v. NOW and Operation Rescue v. NOW cases. The Supreme Court already decided in 2003 that NOW’s ridiculous racketeering suit against pro-life protesters outside clinics was, well, ridiculous. These cases were clean-up matters, because the 7th Circuit kept the matter alive even after the Court’s 2003 decision.

In an 8-0 decision, the Court ended the racketeering nonsense against the abortion protesters. So how does the AP report it?

The Supreme Court dealt a setback Tuesday to abortion clinics in a two-decade-old legal fight over anti-abortion protests, ruling that federal extortion and racketeering laws cannot be used to ban demonstrations.

A setback to abortion clinics? How ‘bout a blow for free speech? The First Amendment? You know, free assembly and all? Even PETA, the AFL-CIO, and Martin Sheen sided with Scheidler to protect their right to protest. Instead the AP calls NOW’s legal strategy “novel.” Try “batty” or “totalitarian.”