The U.S. Solicitor General's office is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to deny an appeal by pro-life activists who say their "Wanted" posters of abortion doctors are protected free speech.

At issue here are posters from a Web site, "The Nuremberg Files," that do not threaten actual violence against abortionists, but "target" them for protest and possible prosecution. Are they threatening or not? A lower court said they are, and the Bush administration agrees. The defendants appealed the case, but this week, U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson asked the Supreme Court not to hear the case and let the lower court ruling stand against the anti-abortion protesters.

Joe Scheidler, with the Pro-Life Action League, said the administration has it wrong.

"It might be a threat to (an abortionist's) abortion business because you might inform a woman of how dangerous it is to go to this facility or use this doctor's services, but it has nothing to do with threatening the doctor," Scheidler said.

Tom Breca, with the Thomas More Law Center, agreed this is a free speech issue.

"This makes it very difficult for nonviolent people to speak up and voice their convictions," Breca said.

But there are concerns. How far is too far? For Tom Lothamer, executive director of Baptists for Life, the issue is really a very simple one.

"To go after (abortionists) in that type of activity is a real concern to us and does not really, in our opinion, help the pro-life cause," Lothamer said. "If we're going to reach out in Christ's name, we personally don't believe that's the way to do it. We believe in reaching out with kindness, but yet persuasive argument "

The Supreme Court will probably decide sometime in the next month whether or not they'll take the case.