The next test of abortion rights in the US
The US Supreme Court is set to rule on a major abortion case that will decide the legality of a Louisiana law that imposes restrictions on abortion doctors.
15 May 2020
(21 minute podcast)
The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on a case that could change abortion access across the country.
Abortion has been legal in the US since the 1973 Supreme Court decision known as Roe v Wade. But at the state level, there is an increasing patchwork of laws designed to restrict access to abortions. Those restrictions often disproportionately affect poor people and communities of colour.
When Will These Attacks on Abortion Rights End? You Won’t Like the Answer.
Legal precedent means very little to judges and justices personally opposed to abortion rights, as we've seen during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Apr 22, 2020
Jessica Mason Pieklo
It seems each day brings new developments on abortion rights in the time of COVID-19. It’s maddening and has left me with one lingering question: Will this shit ever end?
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit once again put a halt on nearly all abortions in Texas, issuing a ruling Monday allowing the state to enforce Gov. Greg Abbott’s (R) COVID-19 ban.
The Supreme Court’s Fictional Middle Ground on Abortion
There is no such thing.
By Linda Greenhouse, Contributing Opinion Writer
March 12, 2020
Following last week’s argument in a Louisiana abortion case, the consensus among attentive Supreme Court-watchers is that the outcome depends on Chief Justice John Roberts, who seemed not to share Justice Samuel Alito’s visceral dislike of abortion clinics and his deep suspicion of doctors who work in them. I agree.
Further, many of these close observers came away believing that even if the justices rule for Louisiana, they will take neither of the two drastic steps being pressed on the court by the state and its White House ally: to reject four decades of settled law under which doctors can challenge abortion restrictions on their patients’ behalf, or to overturn the 2016 decision that struck down the same admitting-privileges requirement in Texas that Louisiana is now defending.
The Future Of Abortion Is In The Hands Of John Roberts
Medically unnecessary laws regulating abortion have been exposed as dishonest attempts to close clinics. Will the Supreme Court still give them legal cover?
By Melissa Jeltsen, HuffPost US
In 2016, Louisiana had six abortion clinics. By 2017, the number had dwindled to three. Soon, there may be only one clinic left to serve nearly 1 million women of reproductive age in the state. Whether or not this happens will likely depend on the outcome of a critical abortion case now with the Supreme Court.
The case centers on a Louisiana law that requires doctors who provide abortions to have “admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic, a difficult-to-obtain arrangement that critics say is a sly attempt to wipe out abortion access in the state.
The supreme court has put the future of abortion rights in doubt. We must organize
This is happening against the will of the American people. The vast majority – 77% – support Roe v Wade
Alexis McGill Johnson
Fri 6 Mar 2020
Abortion access in America is hanging by a thread. On Wednesday, I sat in the US supreme court and listened to the case – June Medical Services v Russo – that could be the beginning of the end of Roe v Wade.
As the president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, it was my privilege to be one of the few listening in the court – but the reality is that this case will affect the rights and lives of millions.
Justices Give Few Hints on How They Will Rule on Louisiana Abortion Law
The Supreme Court is considering whether Louisiana can require doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, in a case likely to yield an unusually telling decision.
By Adam Liptak
March 4, 2020
WASHINGTON — The argument at times sounded like a sterile analysis undertaken by management consultants: What were the benefits of requiring doctors who perform abortions to have relationships with nearby hospitals? Would requiring such relationships force abortion clinics to close?
The questions — about medical regulations, hospital bylaws, travel times and safety records — could seem pedestrian in their granular details. But the cost-benefit analysis undertaken on Wednesday at the Supreme Court illustrated its current approach to the right to abortion, one that seems to turn on contested factual disputes rather than broad constitutional principles.
The National Right To Abortion Is Facing An Intense Threat. This Group Has Been Preparing For This Fight For Decades.
The Center for Reproductive Rights will argue in the first major Supreme Court case over abortion in the Trump era, which could gut Roe v. Wade
Ema O'Connor BuzzFeed News Reporter
Posted on March 1, 2020
It is no exaggeration to say that the Center for Reproductive Rights was made for this moment.
Around 30 years ago, Nancy Northup, the center’s current president, was outside an abortion clinic in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, linking arms with the people around her to form a human barricade to protect patients trying to get inside. Hundreds of anti-abortion protesters faced them down, chanting, saying prayers, and attempting to block patients from entering the clinic.
The Next Big Abortion Case Comes Down to John Roberts
By Irin Carmon, The Intelligencer
Feb. 28, 2020
Almost four years ago, I sat on a cable-news set waiting for the Supreme Court to hand down a ruling on a Texas abortion law that, reputable medical organizations agreed, amounted to a bogus justification for shutting down abortion clinics. The live feed was trained on candidate Hillary Clinton’s Cincinnati rally, featuring Elizabeth Warren, who had just endorsed her.
Alike in blonde bobs and jewel tones, if not much else, the two raised their clasped hands to the sky in a show of party unity and the hint of an all-female ticket, or at least a future in which reproductive autonomy, along with everything else, didn’t depend on the whims of a tiny number of white men. The particular man we were waiting on that day was Justice Anthony Kennedy. Minutes later, the networks cut away to announce that his vote in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt would keep the clinics open, ruling that the Texas law placed an unconstitutional burden on women.
June v. Gee: When the Issue Involves Pregnancy and Abortion Inconsistency Should Come as No Surprise
February 16, 2020
Lynn M. Paltrow
Edited by: Tim Zubizarreta
This year, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider June Medical Services v. Gee, the first abortion case since Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh became members of that court. The Court will rule on the constitutionality of a Louisiana law that is identical to a Texas law struck down by the Supreme Court in 2016. In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the Court held that a Texas law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital was unconstitutional because it imposed a substantial and undue burden on women seeking abortions. Three years later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ignored this precedent and reached the opposite conclusion, deciding that an identical admitting-privileges law in Louisiana did not impose a substantial or undue burden.
Contradictory? Yes. But these rulings are also in keeping with a Court that has never arrived upon a consistent view of the rights of the 51% of people who have the capacity for pregnancy – the precursor to abortion. Stories from two other Supreme Court cases illustrate this.
End of Roe v Wade? June Medical Services v Gee abortion case could irreversibly weaken landmark judgment
The landmark 1973 Roe v Wade judgment gives pregnant women liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction and June Medical Services v Gee poses a threat to abortion rights in the country
By Priyam Chhetri
Jan 28, 2020
Come March, the Supreme Court will hear two consolidated cases, June Medical Services v Gee and Gee v June Medical Services, which is being predicted as the greatest threat to abortion rights in the country in decades. It will also potentially hurt the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade judgment that gives pregnant women liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction.
Here's everything you need to know about the case.