March Leaders Not Settling for High Turnout

But for at least three decades, some activists have been frustrated with what they see as a lack of results from this approach and have taken different paths. One example is the anti-globalization movement, whose partisans have mounted edgier, sometimes violent protests in the District and other cities around the world.

Such protesters "are disgusted by the democratic process and . . . want a totally different style of march," Barber said.

That works for a while, said Moises Naim, the editor of Foreign Policy magazine, "but it is not enough to denounce." The problem is that once activists start to espouse policy solutions and reforms, "you become boring." Indeed, Saturday's anti-globalization protests drew only a few thousand people.

The Supreme Court, in some ways the key institution of government on the abortion issue, has long been considered immune to the cries of protesters. Yet the antiabortion movement claims that one of its biggest marches succeeded in influencing that very institution.

Early in 1992, the Supreme Court voted to consider Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, a case that, in a divided court, constituted a challenge to Roe v. Wade.

"A lot of experts said we were Chicken Little," Smeal recalled. "And we said no, we know it's close."

The march in spring 1992 was one of Washington's largest. Organizers put the number of participants at 750,000; the National Park Service estimated that a half-million came.

Roe, according to the recently released papers of former Supreme Court justice Harry A. Blackmun, was poised for defeat. But in a last-minute switch, Reagan-appointed Justice Anthony M. Kennedy changed his vote, and abortion rights survived, 5 to 4.

"I believe the march had an impact on their decision making," Smeal said. "What happens in the street brings [these issues] home. It impacts the temper of the times."

Despite dozens of demonstrations demanding abortion rights before the original Roe decision, Blackmun said he initially didn't consider the decision a monumental one. In an oral history tape, Blackmun said the demonstrations and letter-writing campaigns protesting the decision convinced him that Roe was a necessary step in the emancipation of women.

"As the furor developed and [Roe's] integrity was attacked and upheld, certainly I came to that conclusion," he said. "I think it was a step that had to be taken."