November 3, 2020
Abortion opponents were among those most excited by the addition of Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court in October. And they had good reason to be.
As a law professor and circuit court judge, Barrett made it clear she is no fan of abortion rights. She is considered likely to vote not only to uphold restrictions on the procedure, but also, possibly, even to overturn the existing national right to abortion under the Supreme Court's landmark rulings in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
PBS, Oct 21, 2020
by Courtney Vinopal
Over her three-day confirmation hearing, Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly declined to discuss her stance on abortion. But while there is no way to know for certain how she will rule on such cases, legal scholars say that her record, as well as a careful reading of certain answers she gave the Senate Judiciary Committee, gives clues about where the Supreme Court could be headed on issues of reproductive rights.
Barrett assured members of the committee that she would bring “no agenda” to her role if confirmed to the high court. She has also expressed anti-abortion beliefs in the past, and joined two dissents on abortion restriction cases during her time on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
(1 hour podcast)
- Yamani Hernandez, executive director of the National Network of Abortion Funds.
- Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
- Kathaleen Pittman, administrator of Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, La., the main plaintiff in June Medical v. Russo.
- Mary Ziegler, Stearns Weaver Miller professor at Florida State University College of Law specializing in the legal history of reproduction, the family, sexuality and the Constitution.
In this Episode:
In June Medical v. Russo, the Supreme Court struck down a challenge to abortion rights in Louisiana, a state in which reproductive health care access is already fraught. The law would have required all doctors performing abortions to obtain hospital admitting privileges. Even though this case has put such challenges to rest, lawmakers in Louisiana have effectively undercut women’s access to reproductive healthcare, causing clinic closures and more. As our guests make clear, Roe is not enough.
US top court strikes down law limiting abortions
29 June 2020
The US Supreme Court has ruled that a law restricting abortions in Louisiana is
In a landmark decision, the justices said a law requiring that doctors who
provide abortions have the right to admit patients at a local hospital placed
an undue burden on women.
Supreme Court hands down major decision reaffirming
The case, June Medical Services v. Russo, has major
By Alexandra Svokos, ABC News Daily
29 June 2020
The Supreme Court announced a major ruling on abortion, deciding that the
Louisiana law is unconstitutional and should not stand.
The opinion was written by Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justices Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts
also filed an opinion concurring for the majority.
'Clinics will be forced to close': Abortion rights backers fearful of upcoming Supreme Court ruling
A Louisiana law in question requires clinic doctors to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.
June 7, 2020
By Chloe Atkins
The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on its first major abortion case since President Donald Trump put in place a conservative majority on the bench.
At the heart of the case is a Louisiana law, Act 620, that requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic. If the law is upheld, a district court found that Louisiana would be left with one abortion clinic to serve the nearly 10,000 women who seek abortions in the state annually.
Abortion providers say they're experiencing a "post-Roe" world. Others say it's worse.
By Kate Smith, CBS News
April 28, 2020
Sarah got a glimpse earlier this month of what a world without legal abortion might look like.
Out of work and unexpectedly pregnant, Sarah, 20, had her appointment cancelled when Texas halted most abortion services as a way to preserve medical resources to fight the coronavirus pandemic. Desperate, she searched for a doctor who might offer the procedure under the table, or a pharmacist who might illegally fill a prescription for abortion-inducing pills. She had no car or money, so making the 15-hour drive to New Mexico, the site of the closest provider, was out of reach. But for Sarah, keeping the pregnancy wasn't an option.
Texas Allows Abortions to Resume During Coronavirus Pandemic
After weeks of wrangling in the courts, the state eased the restrictions on some surgical procedures, including abortion.
By Sabrina Tavernise
April 22, 2020
WASHINGTON — In a surprise move on Wednesday night, the authorities in Texas abandoned their fight to include abortion in a list of medical procedures that must be delayed during the coronavirus pandemic.
During the weeks of legal wrangling that went all of the way to the Supreme Court, Texas had argued that abortion was like any other elective surgery, and should be delayed to preserve the personal protective equipment needed by medical workers exposed to the virus.
So far, U.S. courts rule for abortion rights during coronavirus pandemic
Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung, Reuters
April 14, 2020
WASHINGTON/NEW YORK — Texas women regained some access to abortion on Tuesday after a court blocked a state effort to limit it due to the coronavirus, showing how even conservative-leaning courts are pushing back on Republican-led efforts to change social policy in the pandemic.
The move by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals late Monday night was one in a flurry of rulings by federal courts that have acted to secure the right to at least some abortions as Republican-led states have sought to curb the procedure as part of their emergency response. More than 25,000 Americans have died from COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the new coronavirus.
Federal judges in 3 U.S. states block orders limiting abortion access over COVID-19
Caroline Kelly, CNN
Published Tuesday, March 31, 2020
Federal judges in Alabama, Ohio and Texas have blocked orders banning nonessential medical procedures from limiting abortion access during the coronavirus outbreak, a win for abortion rights activists as the fight over abortion rights intersects with the worsening pandemic.
"Because Alabama law imposes time limits on when women can obtain abortions, the March 27 order is likely to fully prevent some women from exercising their right to obtain an abortion," federal Judge Myron Thompson, from the Middle District of Alabama, wrote Monday. He temporarily halted the order, issued by the state's Health Department earlier this month, until April 13.