Colorado’s official state antagonism to Christianity – the Supreme Court once called it “hostility” – is well-established.

But now there’s a case going to the Supreme Court that would, if successful, destroy one precedent from the leftist state – a government’s authority to suppress pro-life speech.

Colorado was taken to the Supreme Court several years by Jack Phillips, who had been ordered by officials there to promote an LGBT ideology that violated his Christian faith with has cake artistry.

A similar case against Colorado now is pending before the high court, because Colorado is demanding a web designer promote concepts that are anathema to her Christian faith.

And a Christian preschool has sued the state for demanding that it abrogate its Christian beliefs in order to participate in a state preschool program.

Now it is Becket that is reporting it is going to the high court in Vitigliano v. County of Westchester.

In it a religious sidewalk counselor will ask the justices to “restore her ability to offer compassionate support to women considering abortion outside abortion clinics.”

A successful case would overturn the 2000 ruling by the court in Hill v. Colorado where states and governments were allowed to ban peaceful sidewalk counseling outside abortion businesses.

It is Debra Vitagliano who is challenging a Westchester law modeled after the Colorado scheme.

“Motivated by her Catholic faith and experience as an occupational therapist for children with disabilities, Debra Vitagliano has been called to offer compassionate, face-to-face support to women considering abortion,” Becket explained. “Debra desires to counsel these women outside abortion clinics, but Westchester County recently passed a law restricting discussions about abortion, its alternatives, and resources available to women in need, among other things, on public sidewalks outside abortion clinics.”

The locale has a 100-foot zone around abortion businesses, including public sidewalks, where speech is specifically restricted.

“My faith calls me to offer help to pregnant women considering abortion. In her most vulnerable state, a woman considering an abortion needs to know that she is loved and that there are other options for her and her child,” she said.

Becket explained the case “presents an ideal opportunity for the Supreme Court to right Hill’s wrong and protect all those who want to counsel women considering abortion. The Second Circuit ruled that Debra suffered harm from the county’s law, giving her the right to ‘pursue [her] appeal in the hope that the Supreme Court will revisit and overrule Hill.’”

Becket chief Mark Rienzi said, “Nobody should have to risk jail time and go to court for a peaceful conversation on public sidewalks—even when local government disagrees with them. We are hopeful that the court will take this case and protect Debra’s ability to serve women in need.”

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

This post originally appeared on WND News Center.