The purpose of this Note is to demonstrate that § 1985(3) is not applicable to Operation Rescue's blockade activities. Part II provides a brief survey of the history of § 1985(3) from its roots in the post-Civil War era to the 1950's. Part III examines the requirements for a § 1985(3) claim as delineated in the Griffin, Novotny, and Scott decisions. Part IV applies these requirements to the blockade controversy and argues that: (1) Gender-based animus should be accepted by the Court as a form of class-based animus within the meaning of § 1985(3); (2) the blockades do not fall within § 1985(3) because they are not motivated by a gender-based animus; and (3) the claims against Operation Rescue fail to meet§ 1985(3)'s requirement of interference with an independently existing right as established by the Court in Novotny.
Note, Operation Rescue Blockades and the Misuse of 42 U.S.C. 1985(3), 41 Clev. St. L. Rev. 145 (1993)