SCOTUS Rules Texas Abortion Restictions Unconstitutional

[AR Husker Fan]

U.S. Supreme Court rules that Texas's admitting-privileges and surgical-center requirements place a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, constitute an undue burden on abortion access, and thus violate the Constitution.

 

The facts, in summary:

 

In 2013, the Texas Legislature enacted House Bill 2 (H. B. 2), which contains the two provisions challenged here. The “admittingprivileges requirement” provides that a “physician performing or inducing an abortion . . . must, on the date [of service], have active admitting privileges at a hospital . . . located not further than 30 milesfrom the” abortion facility. The “surgical-center requirement” requires an “abortion facility” to meet the “minimum standards . . . for ambulatory surgical centers” under Texas law. Before the law took effect, a group of Texas abortion providers filed the Abbott case, in which they lost a facial challenge to the constitutionality of the admitting-privileges provision. After the law went into effect, petitioners, another group of abortion providers (including some Abbott plaintiffs), filed this suit, claiming that both the admitting-privileges and the surgical-center provisions violated the Fourteenth Amendment, as interpreted in Casey. They sought injunctions preventing enforcement of the admitting-privileges provision as applied to physicians at one abortion facility in McAllen and one in El Paso and prohibiting enforcement of the surgical-center provision throughout Texas.

 

Based on the parties’ stipulations, expert depositions, and expert and other trial testimony, the District Court made extensive findings, including, but not limited to: as the admitting-privileges requirement began to be enforced, the number of facilities providing abortions dropped in half, from about 40 to about 20; this decrease in geographical distribution means that the number of women of reproductive age living more than 50 miles from a clinic has doubled, the number living more than 100 miles away has increased by 150%, the number living more than 150 miles away by more than 350%, and the number living more than 200 miles away by about 2,800%; the number of facilities would drop to seven or eight if the surgical-center provision took effect, and those remaining facilities would see a significant increase in patient traffic; facilities would remain only in five metropolitan areas; before H. B. 2’s passage, abortion was an extremely safe procedure with very low rates of complications and virtually no deaths; it was also safer than many more common procedures not subject to the same level of regulation; and the cost of compliance with the surgical-center requirement would most likely exceed $1.5 million to $3 million per clinic. The court enjoined enforcement of the provisions, holding that the surgical-center requirement imposed an undue burden on the right of women in Texas to seek previability abortions; that, together with that requirement, the admitting-privileges requirement imposed an undue burden in the Rio Grande Valley, El Paso, and West Texas; and that the provisions together created an “impermissible obstacle as applied to all women seeking a previability abortion.”

Held: Both the admitting-privileges and the surgical-center requirements place a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, constitute an undue burden on abortion access, and thus violate the Constitution.

 

A 5-3 decision. Breyer, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan formed the majority.

[HuskerShark]

Oh look, it's huskerfan2000's abortion thread!

 

But in all seriousness, this is one of the most f*cked-up things about our country - that we have a large portion of our country (and across the world I'm sure) who believe it's OK to kill babies.

[huKSer]

I agree to be pro-life if you agree to be pro-contaceptives

[HuskerShark]

Yes, huKSer. Contraceptives are a great thing. The Plan B pill begins to toe the line, and I don't have a firm opinion on that.

[schriznoeder]

I agree to be pro-life if you agree to be pro-contaceptives

 

I'll go a step further and say that in order to truly be "pro-life" you must also agree to personally raise (or at least pay to raise) an unwanted child to adulthood. Otherwise, you're just "pro-birth."

[HuskerShark]

 

I agree to be pro-life if you agree to be pro-contaceptives

 

I'll go a step further and say that in order to truly be "pro-life" you must also agree to personally raise (or at least pay to raise) an unwanted child to adulthood. Otherwise, you're just "pro-birth."

 

 

Depends on how you mean that. If you mean that if I were to make the choice to have sex and the result was a pregnancy, I'd absolutely raise that child because I'm not a murderer.

 

If you mean that I have to agree to raise the child of someone else who made that choice, that's ridiculous.

[zoogs]

What a relief. The incredible argument that these regulations weren't there simply to restrict abortion was rejected -- if only barely.

[84HuskerLaw]

What a relief. The incredible argument that these regulations weren't there simply to restrict abortion was rejected -- if only barely.

Well, most folks against abortion believe it is not only illegal and immoral I(it is murder of a defenseless child to most people of clear thinking minds), but it is also a dangerous medical procedure that should at a minimum be conducted professionally by licensed physicians who know what the hell they are doing in a safe, hospital or hospital like environment capable of handling unexpected complications, assuring that no malpractice (torture of said unborn child or the death or harm to the naïve mother to be). We'd hope that people getting abortions would want to have safe and reliable medical care and not be treated by the back alley abortionist now setting up shop behind the tattoo parlour or someplace similarly.

[zoogs]

That paragraph is full of easily correctable inaccuracies, particularly about the dangers of the procedure and the characterization of these clinics as "back alley behind the tattoo parlour or someplace similarly." I'll leave it as an exercise in Googling.

 

Kudos on your imagination, though. It's very ... imaginative.

[schriznoeder]

 

 

I agree to be pro-life if you agree to be pro-contaceptives

 

I'll go a step further and say that in order to truly be "pro-life" you must also agree to personally raise (or at least pay to raise) an unwanted child to adulthood. Otherwise, you're just "pro-birth."

 

 

Depends on how you mean that. If you mean that if I were to make the choice to have sex and the result was a pregnancy, I'd absolutely raise that child because I'm not a murderer.

 

If you mean that I have to agree to raise the child of someone else who made that choice, that's ridiculous.

 

 

I admit, what I stated was a bit ridiculous, but I was simply trying to make a point. Simply put, don't claim to be "pro-life" unless you also support all possible measures to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place (sex education, birth control, counselling, etc. - all of which may have to be subsidized). And when unwanted pregnancies do occur, you also support all possible measures to ensure a successful delivery AND a healthy upbringing (prenatal care, well checks, counselling, etc. - all of which may have to be subsidized).

[HuskerShark]

I admit, what I stated was a bit ridiculous, but I was simply trying to make a point. Simply put, don't claim to be "pro-life" unless you also support all possible measures to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place (sex education, birth control, counselling, etc. - all of which may have to be subsidized).

 

 

Yes, birth control, sex education, and counseling should all be available. No, other people should not be forced to pay for it. It's the responsibility of the individual who makes the choice to have sex and get pregnant to deal with the repercussions, wanted or not. We are not a socialist country.

 

And when unwanted pregnancies do occur, you also support all possible measures to ensure a successful delivery AND a healthy upbringing (prenatal care, well checks, counselling, etc. - all of which may have to be subsidized).

 

 

Once again, responsibilities to ensure a successful delivery and upbringing (even if that includes putting the child up for adoption) are the responsibility of the parent. We are not a socialist country.

 

We are not a socialist country.

 

Once again, we are not a socialist country. Nor do we ever want to be one, resemble one, or entertain the thoughts of one.

[knapplc]

We are not not a Socialist country, too.

[HuskerShark]

We are not not a Socialist country, too.

 

Unfortunately, you're right. There are certain programs in our country of a socialist ideology (Social security, medicare, medicaid, etc), all of which should be done away with.

[ZRod]

 

We are not not a Socialist country, too.

 

Unfortunately, you're right. There are certain programs in our country of a socialist ideology (Social security, medicare, medicaid, etc), all of which should be done away with.

Because you know; Jesus said "f#*k your fellow man, get yours." Or was that Trump?

[TGHusker]

 

 

 

I agree to be pro-life if you agree to be pro-contaceptives

 

I'll go a step further and say that in order to truly be "pro-life" you must also agree to personally raise (or at least pay to raise) an unwanted child to adulthood. Otherwise, you're just "pro-birth."

 

 

Depends on how you mean that. If you mean that if I were to make the choice to have sex and the result was a pregnancy, I'd absolutely raise that child because I'm not a murderer.

 

If you mean that I have to agree to raise the child of someone else who made that choice, that's ridiculous.

 

 

I admit, what I stated was a bit ridiculous, but I was simply trying to make a point. Simply put, don't claim to be "pro-life" unless you also support all possible measures to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place (sex education, birth control, counselling, etc. - all of which may have to be subsidized). And when unwanted pregnancies do occur, you also support all possible measures to ensure a successful delivery AND a healthy upbringing (prenatal care, well checks, counselling, etc. - all of which may have to be subsidized).

 

Many prolife organizations do what I've highlighted in bold