Argument #1
The Court should rule in favor of N.O.W.. The antiabortion protestors used systematic intimidation and sometimes violence to stop women from getting abortions, thus financially hurting the business of abortion providers. This was a planned activity which falls under the RICO law. The protestors denied women the right to seek medical services at the clinic, denied the doctors' rights to perform their jobs and denied the clinics' right to conduct their business.

Argument #2
 The Court should rule in favor of Scheidler and the protestors. The protestors have a right to free speech and they are not a criminal organization since they did not financially profit from their actions. If the RICO laws apply to this group it could likewise be used against other legitimate protestors who are exercising their First Amendment rights.