In the first three months of 2016, states introduced more than 400 measures restricting access to abortion.
Advertisement
At the heart of the decision announced Monday in the case of Whole Woman’s Health vs. Oberfeldt were two requirements: one, doctors performing abortions must have admitting privileges and abortion clinics must meet the requirements of a surgical center.
The court’s decision has major implications for the future political battles over abortion beyond Texas.
Clinton has been an advocate for abortion rights since her earliest days in politics, and has become a target for pro-life groups who fear the expansion of abortion access under another Democratic presidency.
EMILY’s List president Stephanie Schriock called the ruling “a victory for women everywhere, reaffirming our right to make our own reproductive health care decisions no matter where we live”. Justice Stephen Breyer’s majority opinion held that the regulations are medically unnecessary and unconstitutionally limit a woman’s right to an abortion. Specifically, Justice Breyer said the state of Texas, “does not show how the new law advanced the State’s legitimate interest in protecting women’s health when compared to the prior law, which required providers to have a “working arrangement” with doctors who had admitting privileges”. After appeal, the Fifth Circuit upheld HB 2 but also allowed Whole Woman’s Health in McAllen, Texas to remain open and serve the Valley pending today’s Supreme Court decision.
The U.S. Supreme Court this morning struck down two provisions passed as House Bill 2 in 2013 that Texas tried to put in place that affected women’s ability to obtain an abortion.
How one “recklessly, but not intentionally” assaults their domestic partner is anybody’s guess, but the Supreme Court wasn’t buying the “heat of the moment” argument.
A similar law Wisconsin Republicans passed in 2013 regarding admitting privileges was struck down by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in November 2015. The requirement is in effect in most of Texas, Missouri, North Dakota and Tennessee. The Casey ruling said that states could impose restrictions as long as they didn’t impose an undue burden on the woman.
She said she expects the Supreme Court on Tuesday will resolve Wisconsin’s petition as well as a petition on a similar MS law, which an appeals court also struck down. In Texas and across the country, a woman’s constitutional right to make her own health decisions is under attack. Clinics won several favorable rulings in a federal district court in Texas.
The court invalidated both of those provisions. It was expected that none of the four liberal justices would rule in favor of the state law.
Advertisement
Separate lawsuits are pending over admitting-privileges laws in Louisiana and MS, the other states covered by the 5th circuit. Texas Sen. John Cornyn said the ruling “sets a risky precedent”, maintaining that that restrictions and requirements of H.B.
