Perhaps instead of portraying this as just another protest from pro-lifers, why don't you show some of the actual LEGAL details of the case, and then show how it was "nonsense", Jessica?

Why? A LEGAL court found that there was no LEGAL basis for denying them. That is good enough for me. Not for you, Nathan?

Thank you to all who supported the Aurora clinic! I was thrilled to get the email this morning with a picture of the "NOW OPEN" sign above it. I'm so pleased they can bring reproductive health services to the women of Aurora.

Anna beat me to it! I don't have to outline how it was nonsense, Nathan, the courts already did that for us. And for anyone who is interested, Amanda has done some great coverage on Aurora.

Anna, Jessica,

It's nonsense to say there was a court decision, much less one which found "that there was no legal basis for denying them." The only court decision rendered so far was the federal court decision which denied Planned Parenthood's motion for an order permitting it to open. What happened is that the Mayor later decided to issue a permit, a matter which is still in litigation. So perhaps you might explain why you believe the Mayor's decision was legally justified (unless you have a link to this imaginary court decision).

No judge had to make a decision as it was always a mayoral decision. The three reports were not official investigations either. So, there was no court issued opening of the clinic, yes, BUT there was no legal basis either.