,
7 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
This is significant, because it chips away at the idea that women's access to abortion should not be limited by undue burdens 1/
In our book on administrative burdens, @pamela_herd & I describe how legislatures creatively used rules to make it more difficult to abortion providers to operate, and women to get an abortion. In 2016, SCOTUS struck down those TRAP laws. 2/ 
@pamela_herd At the time, we warned about a new wave of such laws, with the same basic intent: make abortions more costly by adding new regulations onto the process. We noted fetal cremation laws, such as Indiana's, which the Gorsuch/Kavanaugh SCOTUS just allowed. 3/
@pamela_herd SCOTUS reasons that regulating fetal cremation cannot be an undue burden because plaintiffs did not invoke this standard (Ginsburg disagrees). Not a constitutional lawyer, but in the plain meaning of the term the law adds burdens onto the process. 4/
@pamela_herd If these regulations sound dry and boring, thats the point. But the details are shocking. They are, for example, how Missouri is trying to close its last remaining abortion provider. The state wants to force women to undergo a cervical exam so they can take a pill. 5/
@pamela_herd AL's abortion law assumes that SCOTUS will just reverse Roe.
But the strategy of using burdens to make abortions harder to get is the other, more incrementalist, route. This is how they are making abortion effectively unavailable in MO. 6/
cbsnews.com/news/planned-p…
But the strategy of using burdens to make abortions harder to get is the other, more incrementalist, route. This is how they are making abortion effectively unavailable in MO. 6/
cbsnews.com/news/planned-p…
@pamela_herd Laws that add burdens onto abortion also add significant financial costs to a procedure that is already rarely covered by insurance. For poorer women who struggle to find the money, burdens can effectively remove their choice. 7/ amazon.com/Administrative…
