Pro-life group sues to stop Detroit abortion facility buffer zone law

A pro-life organization is suing the city of Detroit on the basis that the city's buffer zone ordinance, which limits pro-life activity outside of abortion facilities, violates the constitutional rights of sidewalk counselors.

Key Takeaways:

• Sidewalk Advocates for Life and Kevin Hammer have filed a lawsuit contesting Detroit's buffer zone law restricting free speech outside abortion businesses.

• The law has been in place since 2024.

• The plaintiffs, represented by the Thomas More Society, say the law limits Hammer's constitutional right to minister to women outside an abortion business.

The Backstory:

In 2024, the city of Detroit implemented a buffer zone around "health care facilities," including abortion businesses, which requires protesters within a 100-foot zone around the entrance of the facilities to stay at least eight (8) feet away from people unless they gain their consent.

Within the 100-foot zone is another zone 15 feet from the entrance to the facility where protesters cannot congregate or demonstrate. 

The Details:

Last week, the pro-life group Sidewalk Advocates for Life and one of its advocates, Kevin Hammer, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to stop the city's ordinance.

Hammer has reportedly been serving as an advocate with Sidewalk Advocates for Life since September 2025, standing outside The Scotsdale Women's Center in Detroit on Fridays to offer women information about abortion alternatives while holding a sign that says "Ask Me About Free Ultrasounds and Pregnancy Tests." The lawsuit states that twice, police have been called on him — one time responding with five patrol cars — despite the fact that Hammer "does not follow, chase, block, or yell at anyone."

The plaintiffs, represented by the Thomas More Society, contend that the ordinance, "which is enforceable through criminal penalties, violates the Free Speech, Free Exercise, and Freedom of Assembly Clauses of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as the Michigan Constitution."

According to a press release from the Thomas More Society, "the lawsuit notes the ordinance is nearly identical to a Pittsburgh ordinance struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Brown v. City of Pittsburgh — the same fifteen-foot buffer, the same eight-foot bubble, the same combination of overlapping speech-restrictive zones."

The Bottom Line:

Peter Breen, Executive Vice President and Head of Litigation at Thomas More Society, noted that Hammer's actions are well within his rights.

“Every woman facing an unexpected pregnancy deserves to know that help is available — free ultrasounds, pregnancy tests, real support, right there on the sidewalk. That is all Kevin Hammer offers,” Breen said.

“This ordinance does not protect anyone. It makes it a crime to stand on a public sidewalk and offer a woman a choice. The government cannot wall off the public square so that women never hear they have alternatives to abortion. Kevin has the right to stand there without fear.”