The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case with far-reaching implications on how tightly states can regulate abortions clinics.
Advertisement
“Instead, Roe specifically found that a state legislature’s legitimate interest in regulating abortion to protect maternal health ‘obviously extends at least to [regulating] the performing physician and his staff, to the facilities involved, to the availability of after-care, and to adequate provision for any complication or emergency that may arise, ‘” Burke noted. They have turned to the states to chip away at abortion rights by imposing restrictions and waiting periods, making it harder for a pregnant woman to obtain one. A few of the clinics filed suit quickly after Republicans passed the law in 2013 on the grounds it places an “undue” burden on women’s access to abortion. Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole criticizes that law, in part because the number of clinics would drop by 75 percent were the law upheld. But the providers are now asking the Supreme Court to permanently block enforcement of both provisions.
In September, abortion clinics in the state had asked the Court to hear their challenge to the law.
The circuit court also said that under the Supreme Court’s prior decisions, it was required to defer to the state’s asserted “rational” justification for the law – protecting women’s health – even though that assertion is not supported by empirical evidence.
Before the clinic law came into force, the number of abortion clinics in Texas stood at 41. “This law is an end-run around the constitution, created to shut down quality reproductive health clinics”, said Heather Busby, the executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice. Eleven states impose admitting privileges requirements on doctors who perform abortions in clinics, the institute said. The other allows doctors to perform abortions at clinics only if they have admitting privileges at a local hospital.
On the one hand, the abortion industry clamors for uninterrupted taxpayer funding for alleged “women’s healthcare”, denying they use fungible funds for abortion.
The court’s decision will probably arrive in late June, as the presidential campaign enters its final stretch, thrusting the issue to the forefront of public debate. Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from that order.
“The state has wide discretion to pass laws ensuring Texas women are not subject to substandard conditions at abortion facilities”, said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, in a statement released Friday, The Wall Street Journal reported.
“This case represents the greatest threat to women’s reproductive freedom since the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade over 40 years ago”, she added.
Gonidakis said he fully expects the court will uphold the Texas regulations.
Advertisement
Justice Anthony Kennedy will be the pivotal vote in the case, predicts Ohio Right to Life President Michael Gonidakis, who says Kennedy “has been against us as it relates to bans, but supportive as it relates to regulations”.
