US State Department: ‘We are monitoring’ prosecution of UK woman in abortion facility ‘buffer zone’ case and ‘are concerned about freedom of expression’ in Britain

Livia Tossici-Bolt holding her sign in the UK
  • Verdict for Livia Tossici-Bolt, Christian woman who faced criminal trial for holding a sign offering consensual conversation in censorial abortion facility ‘buffer zone’ in Bournemouth, will be released on Friday
  • ADF International is supporting her legal defence
  • US State Department: ‘We are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom… We are monitoring [Dr Tossici-Bolt’s] case’

BOURNEMOUTH (1 April 2025) – A bureau within the US State Department said on Sunday it is “monitoring” the abortion facility “buffer zone” case of a Dorset woman, ahead of the release of her verdict on Friday.

The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labor (DRL), a bureau within the United States Department of State, issued a statement on the case of Livia Tossici-Bolt, 64, on X, saying: “We are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom… We are monitoring [Dr Tossici-Bolt’s] case.”

Dr Tossici-Bolt faced criminal trial this month for holding a sign that said, “Here to talk, if you want,” in a censorial abortion facility “buffer zone”.

Her verdict will be handed down by District Judge Orla Austin on Friday April 4. ADF International is supporting Dr Tossici-Bolt’s legal defence.

In its post, the State Department bureau said: “U.S.-UK relations share a mutual respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. However, as Vice President Vance has said, we are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom.

“While recently in the UK, DRL Senior Advisor Sam Samson met with Livia Tossici-Bolt, who faces criminal charges for offering conversation within a legally prohibited ‘buffer zone’ at an abortion clinic. We are monitoring her case. It is important that the UK respect and protect freedom of expression.”

Dr Tossici-Bolt said: “I am grateful to the US State Department for taking note of my case. Great Britain is supposed to be a free country, yet I’ve been dragged through court merely for offering consensual conversation. I’m thankful to ADF International for supporting my legal defence.

“Peaceful expression is a fundamental right—no one should be criminalised for harmless offers to converse.”

She added: “It is tragic to see that the increase of censorship in this country has made the US feel it has to remind us of our shared values and basic civil liberties.

“I’m grateful to the US administration for prioritising the preservation and promotion of freedom of expression and for engaging in robust diplomacy to that end.

“It deeply saddens me that the UK is seen as an international embarrassment when it comes to free speech. My case, involving only a mere invitation to speak, is but one example of the extreme and undeniable state of censorship in Great Britain today.

“It is important that the government actually does respect freedom of expression, as it claims to.”

Responding to DRL’s comment, barrister and Legal Counsel for ADF International Jeremiah Igunnubole said: “The UK’s censorship crisis is the result of a longstanding failure by British politicians to vigilantly protect fundamental rights in the UK, while hypocritically claiming to champion them abroad.

“We cannot consistently claim the UK is a bastion of free speech when law-abiding citizens like Livia are prosecuted for nothing other than peacefully offering to speak to people. What freedom do we have if citizens cannot offer a consensual conversation in a public space?

“Today, authorities are targeting conversations and even silent prayers they say are related to abortion. Tomorrow, it could be any other topic that goes against the mainstream perspective, as defined and policed by those in power. The slippery slope towards tyranny is clear. This is not how free and democratic countries should function.

“True friends do not stand idly by as their friends blindly walk into a ditch. The robust protection of fundamental freedoms has historically formed the basis of the special relationship between the UK and the US—a relationship that’s now needlessly strained due, in large part, to the current censorial trajectory of Britain.

“It is right for the US State Department and JD Vance to warn the UK that censorship is antithetical to freedom, democracy, and societal flourishing.”

Mr Igunnubole added: “Good relations with the US are key for our economic and military security. Criminal prosecutions for silent prayer and offers of consensual conversation are not only illiberal, but also irresponsible.

“The government must act to ensure that what is undoubtedly our most important diplomatic relationship is not put at risk due to an ideological commitment to censorship.”

District Judge Austin, who will hand down Dr Tossici-Bolt’s verdict on Friday, is the same judge who last October found Adam Smith-Connor guilty for silently praying in a “buffer zone”, in a case which Vice President Vance directly mentioned in his Munich Security Conference Speech.

With ADF International’s support, Mr Smith-Connor will appeal his conviction in a July trial.

Rose Docherty’s “buffer zone” case in Scotland

This is not the first time DRL has commented on UK “buffer zone” censorship.

In February, DRL commented on the arrest of 73-year-old Christian grandmother Rose Docherty for holding a sign that read, “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want,” in a “buffer zone” in Glasgow.

DRL said: “Police in Scotland arrested a woman holding a sign offering to talk to people in a restricted ‘buffer zone.’ Freedom of expression needs to be protected.  We call on governments, whether in Scotland or around the world, to respect freedom of expression for all.”

ADF International is supporting Ms Docherty, who recently rejected a warning sent to her in a letter from the Procurator Fiscal, as it required her to accept her actions were unlawful.

She did not cause harassment, block access to an abortion facility or influence anyone regarding abortion—activities banned in Scotland’s “buffer zones”—but merely exercised her right to freedom of expression, which is protected in national and international law, by offering consensual conversations.

Ms Docherty explained: “I cannot pretend that what I did was unlawful—I merely offered a chat, particularly in the context of anyone experiencing coercion of any kind—an issue firmly on my heart.  

“This is why I will be rejecting the warning I was issued by Scottish authorities, with support from ADF International. It isn’t right to deprive anyone of the right to take up my offer to talk—or to restrict me unfairly from carrying out this peaceful, compassionate action.” 

Reacting to the letter sent by the Procurator Fiscal, Lorcán Price, Irish barrister and Legal Counsel for ADF International, said: “The warning issued by the Scottish authorities in effect demands Rose accept culpability for criminal behaviour. This Christian grandmother stood peacefully, alone, making herself available for a discussion with anyone who wished to speak to her. How can this possibly be outlawed in our society?” 

In his Munich Security Conference speech last month, Vice President JD Vance called out Scotland’s draconian abortion facility “buffer zones”.

The Scottish government last year sent a letter to residents whose houses were in a “buffer zone”, saying: “Activities in a private place (such as a house) within the area between the protected premises and the boundary of a Zone could be an offence if they can be seen or heard within the Zone and are done intentionally or recklessly.”

Green Party MSP Gillian Mackay, who authored the Scottish “buffer zone” law, admitted in an interview following Vice President Vance’s comments that in her view prayer in a private home within a “buffer zone” could be a crime depending “on who’s passing by the window”.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only