In McCullen v. Coakley (2014), the Supreme Court struck down a state law that established a 35-foot buffer zone around facilities that performed abortions because:
a. The regulation allowed for protesters to be so close to the facility that they would disrupt the work of the facility.
b. The regulation exempted union protesting as part of a labor strike and therefore was not content neutral.
c. The buffer zone was too large and thus not narrowly tailored and it burdened more speech that was necessary.
d. The buffer zone amounted to an unconstitutional "taking" of the property of the facilities.
e. The regulation was motivated by "actual malice" toward the likely protesters.