Coalition Life v. City of Carbondale, Illinois

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted March 6, 2024*
Decided March 8, 2024
Before
MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Circuit Judge
MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge
THOMAS L. KIRSCH II, Circuit Judge
No. 23-2367
COALITION LIFE,**
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF CARBONDALE, ILLINOIS,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
No. 23-cv-01651-SPM
Stephen P. McGlynn,
Judge.
O R D E R
Coalition Life sued the City of Carbondale, Illinois, alleging that the City’s
Disorderly Conduct Ordinance violates Coalition Life’s rights under the First and
Fourteenth Amendments. The district court concluded that Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703
* We granted the parties’ joint motion to waive oral argument and have agreed to
decide the case on the briefs and the record. FED. R. A PP . P. 34(f).
** The appellant uses the name “Coalition for Life St. Louis” in its brief, but later
notified us that its legal name changed to “Coalition Life,” effective January 1, 2024. We
have reformed the caption accordingly.
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with F ED. R. APP . P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 23-2367 Page 2
(2000), and our precedent foreclose relief. Coalition Life concedes that it cannot prevail
unless Hill is overruled. Because only the Supreme Court can overrule itself, we affirm.
Coalition Life’s sidewalk counselors attempt to talk to people outside of abortion
facilities and offer information about alternatives to abortion. The counselors get as
close as possible to people in order to “make eye-contact and speak from a normal
conversational distance in a friendly and gentle manner.” Under the Ordinance, a
person commits disorderly conduct by knowingly approaching another person within
eight feet, without that person’s consent, for the purpose of passing leaflets, displaying
signs, or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling. C ARBONDALE, I LL., C ITY
C ODE § 14-4-2(H) (2023). The provision applies to a radius of 100 feet from any entrance
door to a hospital, medical clinic, or healthcare facility. Id. Coalition Life contends that
the Ordinance unconstitutionally infringes on its free speech rights.
The City moved to dismiss the case. It first stated that the Ordinance was
“modeled after and nearly identical to” the statute upheld by the Supreme Court in Hill,
530 U.S. at 707, which has not been overruled. It also noted that the Ordinance
resembles one we upheld in Price v. Chicago, in which we explained that—however
“shaken [its] foundation” may now be—Hill remains binding. 915 F.3d 1107, 1119
(7th Cir. 2019). In response, Coalition Life conceded that it could not succeed “unless
and until Price or Hill are overruled.” The district court then dismissed the case.
On appeal, Coalition Life again concedes that Hill controls and that we cannot
overrule a decision of the Supreme Court. See Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203, 237 (1997)
(the Supreme Court retains the “prerogative of overruling its own decisions”). That is
correct: We remain bound by Hill because the Supreme Court—though it has
questioned the case’s viability—has not expressly overruled it. See Grayson v. Schuler,
666 F.3d 450, 453 (7th Cir. 2012) (“[W]e’re not supposed to declare a decision by the
Supreme Court overruled unless the Court makes clear that the case has been overruled,
even if we’re confident that the Court would overrule it …”).
The arguments advanced by Coalition Life are foreclosed, and the judgment of
the district court is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --