Specifically, the Court will decide if it’s an “undue burden” to require abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles, as well as requiring an abortion facility to operate according to the same standards as other surgical centers. The tie vote would have the effect of affirming the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the Texas law. While he didn’t tip his hand as to where he would come down in the case, the tenor of his questions made it unlikely that he would join the three conservative justices completely in a decision wholly upholding the Texas law.
Advertisement
Lawyer-turned-documentarian Dawn Porter lets the people affected by these laws speak, interviewing the doctors and staff of abortion clinics to show the absurdity of the claim that the TRAP laws are based on concerns for women’s health and safety.
The Georgia Life Alliance, an anti-abortion group, said it’s awaiting the high court ruling to see if it can promote more clinic requirements, like the ones Texas imposed, in Georgia.
The conservative justices largely took issue with the question of whether the plaintiff could prove that Texas’s restrictions directly led to the closure of clinics. They believe the extra expense to implement the safety standards will cause abortion clinics to close.
WASHINGTON, DC – MARCH 2: Pro-choice advocates (left) and anti-abortion advocates (right) rally outside of the Supreme Court, March 2, 2016 in Washington, DC.
“This is all about women’s health and quality of care for whatever kind of decision they choose to make”, said Rep. Jodie Lautenberg, R-Texas.
Kennedy at one point suggested sending the case back to a lower court to get further evidence on the law’s impact, including an assessment of the ability of existing Texas clinics to meet the demand for abortions.
Kennedy’s questioning betrayed little about which side will receive his crucial vote.
During Wednesday’s hearing, the four liberal justices expressed opposition to the law, Reuters reported.
The Texas law has nothing to do with protecting women’s health and everything to do with restricting women’s rights.
The Supreme Court announced in November that it will hear Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt – a lawsuit brought by Texas abortion providers against these restrictions.
After the recent death of Antonin Scalia, there are now only eight justices on the bench.
Under Texas’ House Bill 2, doctors performing abortions must obtain hospital admitting privileges near their practices.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted that one provision requires women to visit an outpatient surgical center even when they are simply taking a pill to induce a medical abortion. The abortionproviders who have challenged it assert that the regulations are aimed at shutting down their clinics.
The case will examine whether the measure is creating substantial obstacles for Texas women in a way that places an undue burden on a woman’s constitutional right to end her pregnancy before fetal viability. In 2015 alone, 17 states passed more than 50 abortion restrictions and 11 states slashed funding to Planned Parenthood.
Advertisement
The abortion providers also are challenging provisions in the law, not yet in effect, that mandate that clinics have costly, hospital-grade facilities.
