SCOTUS Strikes Down Draconian Abortion Laws!

The Supreme Court sided with women's groups. It struck down a controversial Louisiana law.

The controversial abortion law in Louisiana is struck down by the Supreme Court. In a 5-4 decision, the Court sided with women's rights groups.

Chief Justice John Roberts along with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Elena Kagan ruled in favor of the women's rights groups that sued the state of Louisiana.

Those opposed were Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

The Louisiana law requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to obtain an abortion.

June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo (formerly June Medical Services, LLC v. Gee) (591 U.S. ___ (2020)) was a U.S. Supreme Court case which ruled that a Louisiana state law placing hospital-admission requirements on abortion clinics doctors, which had mirrored a Texas state law previously found unconstitutional under Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (579 U.S. ___ (2016)) (WWH), was also unconstitutional.

The Louisiana state law, mirroring one that had passed in Texas, requires doctors performing abortions to have admission privileges at a state-authorized hospital within 30 miles (48 km) of the abortion clinic. As in Texas, this law would have limited abortions to one single doctor in the state, as other doctors had not yet gained admission privileges or are outside the given range. The Texas law was declared unconstitutional in WWH in 2016, on the basis that limiting clinic availability was an undue burden on women seeking legal abortions, a constitutional right as determined by the landmark Roe v. Wade case.

The Louisiana law, however, had survived its challenge on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which ruled the law had fundamental differences from the Texas law based on the WWH ruling.

On June 29, 2020, the Supreme Court ruled on a 5–4 decision that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional, reversing the Fifth Circuit's decision. The Court's plurality opinion was written by Justice Stephen Breyer and joined by the three more liberal members of the Court, asserting that Louisiana's law unconstitutional following from the same arguments that Texas's law had been in WWH and overruling the Fifth Circuit's reasoning. Chief Justice John Roberts joined them in the judgement but not in the opinion, upholding his position of dissent from WWH but deferring to a matter of past precedent to support the judgement. The remaining four Justices submitted their own dissents upholding the law's constitutionality.

June Medical Services had been considered a potentially important case on abortion rights in the United States, as it was the first abortion-related case to be heard by both Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, two justices that are considered conservative, giving the Court a conservative majority, and potentially threatening the Roe v. Wade precedent.

Thursday's 138-page decision, written by Justice Stephen Breyer, found Louisiana's restriction — which requires doctors who provide abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital — violated precedent set in the 2016 Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt ruling, a case that dealt with a nearly identical regulation in Texas.

In his opinion, Breyer wrote that Louisiana's law was "unconstitutional."

The Supreme Court has ruled against Donald J. Trump multiple times.

"This case is similar to, nearly identical with, Whole Woman's Health. And the law must consequently reach a similar conclusion," Breyer wrote. Chief Justice Roberts did not join Breyer's opinion but concurred with the ruling on the basis of maintaining precedents previously decided by the Supreme Court.

Plaintiffs in the case, known as June Medical Services v. Russo, challenged Louisiana's "Unsafe Abortion Protection Act," a law that has been blocked by courts since its passage in 2014. Supporters of the law say it was designed to improve patient safety, but critics say its intention was to shut down clinics that provide abortion.

Major professional medical organizations — including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists — disagreed with the health claims, saying that given the safety of the procedure, admitting privilege laws for abortion providers are medically unnecessary.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, the law firm that challenged the law, praised the decision on Monday, but added that abortion rights remain uncertain.

"We're relieved that the Louisiana law has been blocked today but we're concerned about tomorrow," said Nancy Northup, the center's president and chief executive officer, in a statement emailed to CBS News on Monday. "[T]he Court's decision could embolden states to pass even more restrictive laws when clarity is needed if abortion rights are to be protected."

Alexis McGill Johnson, Planned Parenthood's president, sounded a similar warning, saying "the fight is far from over."

"While today is a victory for Louisianans, we must remember that we are in a world where politicians have pushed basic health care almost out of reach for millions of Americans, and where your ability to access abortion is still determined by where you live, how much money you make, and in this country that effectively also means the color of your skin," McGill wrote in a statement to CBS News.

The White House called the Monday's decision an "unfortunate ruling," and defended states' authority to regulate abortion.

"[T]he Supreme Court devalued both the health of mothers and the lives of unborn children," the White House statement said. "... States have legitimate interests in regulating any medical procedure — including abortions — to protect patient safety. Instead of valuing fundamental democratic principles, unelected Justices have intruded on the sovereign prerogatives of State governments by imposing their own policy preference in favor of abortion to override legitimate abortion safety regulations."

As of November, only one of the five doctors who provide abortions in Louisiana was in compliance with the law, a physician in the northwest corner of the state. However, that doctor's administrator told CBS News that if the law were implemented, he would quit to avoid harassment from anti-abortion rights groups over being "the last man standing."

The author of the law, Louisiana State Representative Katrina Jackson, has denied that its purpose was to reduce abortion access, and called the regulation "common-sense women's health care."

Elizabeth Murrill, the state's solicitor general and attorney who defended the regulation in front of the Supreme Court, agreed, saying its purpose was "to protect the health and safety of women who are having abortions."

Louisiana state lawmaker Katrina Jackson sponsored this law. She is a thorn to women's right. She is a Republican running as a Democrat in Monroe, Louisiana.

Monday's decision was a blow to anti-abortion rights activists, who have seen Trump's presidency as an opening to reverse legal protections for abortion. In a statement emailed to CBS News on Monday, Jeanne Mancini, the president of March for Life, said she was "appalled" by the decision.

"This decision underscores the importance of nominating and confirming judges who refrain from legislating from the bench, something pro-life voters will certainly remember come November," Mancini said.

Democrats were pissed at Gov. John Bel Edwards because he signed off this law going against his own party's stance on women's rights.

Louisiana Democratic lawmaker Katrina Jackson sponsored and pushed for the passage of this law.

Jackson is a Black conservative Democrat who authored this law. She called the decision a "tragedy."

"The Supreme Court has issued a tragic decision that continues its practice of putting the interest of for-profit abortion businesses ahead of the health and safety of women. Together with my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans and women and men, we passed the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act to protect the health and safety of women in Louisiana. While today's decision is not what we wanted, we will never stop working to put the women of Louisiana above the interests of the abortion business."

Bel Edwards signed off a controversial law that is known as the fetal heartbeat abortion ban. It would ban abortions after six weeks. That law is on hold as it makes it through the courts.