Supreme Court ruling may cause tens of thousands to lose birth control coverage
By Robert Barnes
July 8, 2020
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration may allow employers and universities to opt out of the Affordable Care Act requirement to provide contraceptive care because of religious or moral objections.
The issue has been at the heart of an intense legal
battle for nine years — first with the Obama administration sparring with
religious organizations who said offering contraceptive care to their employees
violated their beliefs, and then with the Trump administration broadening an
exemption, angering women’s groups, health organizations and Democratic-led
July 8, 2020
The U.S. Supreme Court has made it more difficult for women to get access to birth control as part of their health plans if their employer has religious or moral objections to contraceptives.
The opinion upheld a Trump administration rule that significantly cut back on the Affordable Care Act requirement that insurers provide free birth control coverage as part of almost all health care plans.
Jul 03, 2020
As pro-choice advocates in Louisiana breathe a sigh of relief after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the June Medical Services case last week, Tennessee is gearing up for a fight against one of the most restrictive anti-abortion bills in the country—one that advocates say targets people of color.
Used as a bargaining chip while negotiating the state budget, the bill was passed in the early morning hours of June 19 when the Tennessee Senate made a last-minute deal with the House to pass a six-week abortion ban, which is unconstitutional because it makes it medically and logistically impossible for most people to determine that they are pregnant and arrange for abortion care.
The Supreme Court’s
abortion decision seems pulled from the ‘Casey’ playbook
Opinion by Melissa Murray
June 29, 2020
Depicted as a serpent or a dragon eating its own tail, the ouroboros in Greek
mythology was interpreted as a symbol of eternal renewal — the infinite cycle
of life, death and rebirth. Now, the ouroboros lives on in the Supreme Court’s
abortion jurisprudence and in the court’s invocation of the doctrine of stare
Latin for “let the decision stand,” stare decisis has shaped the court’s
abortion jurisprudence — and the public debate over abortion rights. Consider
the calls to overrule Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that
recognized a woman’s right to choose an abortion. Although abortion opponents
insist that Roe is both morally abhorrent and constitutionally unprincipled,
the court, citing deference to precedent, has declined multiple invitations to
overrule the decision.
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.
Explaining the third-party question in the Supreme Court abortion case
Third-party standing could impact abortion cases down the road.
By Alexandra Svokos
21 June 2020
The Supreme Court will be announcing a decision in a major abortion case soon, and while it's centered on one state law, another question has come up in the case that could have massive consequences for the future of abortion laws in America.
June Medical Services v. Russo is a challenge to a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers have admitting privileges with a nearby hospital, an agreement between a doctor and a hospital that allows a patient to go to that hospital if they need urgent care.
All eyes on Roberts ahead of Supreme Court's abortion ruling
By John Kruzel, The Hill
Chief Justice John Roberts is under the microscope as the Supreme Court prepares to issue its first major ruling on abortion rights in the Trump era, which will give the clearest indication yet of the court’s willingness to revisit protections that were first granted in Roe v. Wade.
The tie-breaking vote may rest with Roberts, and the case stands to test his role as the court’s new ideological center as well as his allegiance to past rulings.
'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.
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.
Will the Supreme Court let Texas’s latest assault on women’s rights proceed?
By Ruth Marcus
April 12, 2020
No constitutional right is absolute; the Constitution, we are told, is not a suicide pact. In a pandemic, otherwise sacrosanct rights must yield to the common good.
So, to prevent the spread of the virus, governors can order the cancellation of mass gatherings — even when those gatherings are religious services, so long as their edicts do not single out religion. Similarly, the Second Amendment right to bear arms would probably not prevent orders closing gun shops among other “non-essential” businesses during the pandemic, any more than the First Amendment would prohibit the shuttering of bookstores.