Whew! It’s been exactly a year since the Supreme Court shook @AngryBlackLady and @Hegemommy to their core by siding against Louisiana in June Medical Services v. Russo.
As yet another abortion fight looms at the Court, we’re looking back on the significance of the case.
As yet another abortion fight looms at the Court, we’re looking back on the significance of the case.
June Medical Services was about a Louisiana law that required abortion providers to get admitting privileges at a local hospital.
These kinds of laws seem reasonable enough, but they are designed to force clinics to close.
These kinds of laws seem reasonable enough, but they are designed to force clinics to close.
Lawmakers claim that admitting privileges laws protect pregnant patients, but that is poppycock.
Due to abortion stigma and the Catholic takeover of hospitals, many hospitals refuse to grant admitting privileges to abortion providers. Lawmakers know this.
Due to abortion stigma and the Catholic takeover of hospitals, many hospitals refuse to grant admitting privileges to abortion providers. Lawmakers know this.
That’s why admitting privileges laws are clinic shutdown laws. When abortion providers seek admitting privileges and (predictably) are refused, they’re forced to stop practicing and clinics are forced to close.
That’s what happened in Texas.
Louisiana modeled its admitting privileges law on Texas’, even citing the Texas law’s success in closing clinics during legislative hearings on the bill.
Louisiana modeled its admitting privileges law on Texas’, even citing the Texas law’s success in closing clinics during legislative hearings on the bill.
In 2016, the Supreme Court ruled in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt that Texas’ admitting privileges law was unconstitutional. Even though the Texas and Louisiana laws are identical, the makeup of the Court was different then.
With a conservative majority on the Court in 2020, June Medical Services was a nail-biter.
rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2020/0…
rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2020/0…
But abortion rights advocates in Louisiana lived to fight another day: Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the opinion in JMS, affirming the majority opinion he penned in Whole Woman’s Health and ruling that Louisiana’s admitting privilege law was an undue burden.
But like any abortion fight, it was just the tip of the iceberg.
Despite the victory at the Supreme Court, the decision simply maintained the status quo in Louisiana. rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2020/0…
Despite the victory at the Supreme Court, the decision simply maintained the status quo in Louisiana. rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2020/0…
And now another abortion case will be argued before the Supreme Court later this year: Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
The case is about whether Mississippi’s 15-week gestational ban is constitutional.
rewirenewsgroup.com/ablc/2021/05/2…
The case is about whether Mississippi’s 15-week gestational ban is constitutional.
rewirenewsgroup.com/ablc/2021/05/2…
The case should be a no-brainer. It involves a pre-viability abortion ban—and as our #TeamLegal @AngryBlackLady and @Hegemommy always say: PRE-VIABILITY ABORTION BANS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
But there’s a 6-3 conservative majority on the Court now, so it’s another nail-biter.
But there’s a 6-3 conservative majority on the Court now, so it’s another nail-biter.
Jackson Women’s Health could have a devastating impact in Louisiana—and on Roe v. Wade as we know it.
rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2021/0…
rewirenewsgroup.com/article/2021/0…
Continue following us here and on Instagram (@RewireNewsGroup) as we bring you expert analysis on Jackson Women’s Health, the Supreme Court, and what comes next in the fight for abortion access.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
