Heated testimony as committee considers repeal of patient-safety buffer zones

Representative Boris Ors, sponsor of HB 13-13, described the patient-safety zone statute as an unnecessary restriction on free speech and urged repeal. "This law has never been used since it was passed 11 years ago," Ors said, arguing the statute invites legal challenges.

Planned Parenthood’s Kayla Montgomery and Equality Health Center’s Sarah Anderson strongly opposed repeal. Montgomery described a flexible 25-foot patient-safety zone as a nonmandatory, locality-specific tool that helps protect patients and staff from harassment and photographing: "This law does not remove free speech of any sort. It just increases public safety and privacy," she said. Anderson and other health center witnesses described incidents including photographing of patients and staff, driveway blockages and a protester who openly carried weapons in one instance; they argued discretionary buffer zones help local authorities and clinics manage safety.

Pro-repeal witnesses and residents said the zone restricts sidewalk counseling and peaceful prayer and that existing laws (criminal statutes, FACE Act) can address obstruction or threats. Several witnesses argued the statute chills lawful speech because signs and drawn lines have discouraged people from standing closer to clinics even though the zones have rarely been activated.

Committee members asked about constitutionality, past litigation and enforcement. Witnesses on both sides pointed to differing legal interpretations, Supreme Court precedent (where some buffer zones have been struck down) and to local variation in clinic footprints. No vote was taken; the committee closed the hearing after rounds of testimony from advocates, residents and municipal witnesses.