The Future Of Roe V. Wade After A Louisiana Abortion Case
In 2016, the Supreme Court voted against a restrictive abortion law in Texas.
Politico recapped the case:
In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt , a group of Texas abortion clinics had challenged the state law that required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and to perform abortions only in ambulatory surgical centers.
Opponents of the law said the restrictions have already closed half of the state’s abortion clinics, imposing an undue burden on a woman’s access to abortion. Texas argued that states have a long-standing right to regulate medical procedures to ensure patient safety.
The court ruled that it posed an undue burden on a woman’s constitutional right to access an abortion.
Now, SCOTUS is hearing oral arguments for a very similar case based on a Louisana law. In June Medical Services v. Russo,the Court will decide on a 2014 law, which also requires doctors who perform abortions to have hospital admitting privileges.
There are three abortion clinics in Louisiana. And a decision to uphold the law would mean all three of them would stop offering the procedure.
Who are the justices to watch in this case? And what could this case tell us about the future of Roe v. Wade?
Copyright 2020 WAMU 88.5. To see more, visit WAMU 88.5.