Commentary

Expert: Supreme Court about to issue the most important abortion ruling in a quarter century

What is about bills labeled “HB2”?  In Texas, state lawmakers approved an “HB2” a while back that would all but end the right to a safe, legal abortion for Texas women. Now the eight justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will soon rule on that law. As Ian Millhiser of Think Progress explains, it will be a momentous ruling:

“The Texas law at issue in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the case current pending before the Supreme Court, is the culmination of this strategy by abortion opponents. Masterminded by Americans United for Life, a sophisticated group that drafts model legislation for state lawmakers eager to restrict access to abortion, Texas’ HB2 imposes expensive architectural and other requirements on abortion clinics and often-difficult-to-obtain credentialing requirements on abortion providers.

On the surface, HB2 appears to be a rather ordinary series of health regulations. It’s defenders argue that HB2’s requirement that abortion clinics comply with the costly standards Texas imposes on “ambulatory surgical centers,” for example, will make these facilities safer for women by bringing them into compliance with standards that are already imposed on many other facilities that perform surgeries.

If a court digs just a few inches below the surface, however, it rapidly becomes clear that the the law imposes potentially crippling burdens on abortion clinics, often with no apparent health benefits whatsoever. The ambulatory surgical center requirement, for example, applies even to clinics that perform no surgeries all at — many clinics only offer medication abortions, which are induced by pills taken orally.

Before HB2, Texas had 40 licensed abortion clinics. If the law takes full effect, a trial judge wrote that “only seven facilities and a potential eighth will exist in Texas that will not be prevented . . . from performing abortions.”

A decision upholding HB2 would likely endanger these remaining abortion clinics as well, because it is almost certain that states like Texas would try to push the envelope even further if they scored a big victory in the Supreme Court. Once the courts permit states to enact sham health laws whose real purpose is to restrict abortion, the only limit on such restrictions may be lawmakers’ ability to pass clever laws. A decision upholding HB2 could allow abortion opponents to turn packs of wolves loose in abortion clinics, so long as those wolves are dressed in sheep’s clothing.

Fortunately for abortion providers, the possibility that Texas will win outright in Whole Woman’s Health appears to have died with the late Justice Antonin Scalia. At oral argument, the Court’s four liberals took turns pummeling Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller as he tried to defend the law. In a Court that’s down one member, four is enough to prevent the justices from handing down a precedent-setting decision permitting laws like HB2 to thrive nationwide.

Nevertheless, the stakes remain high in Whole Woman’s Health, in large part because Texas won its case in the conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. If the Supreme Court splits 4-4, that Fifth Circuit decision will remain in effect for at least as long as it takes for the justices to consider this issue again after their ninth colleague is confirmed.

That said, a 4-4 split did not appear likely after the justices heard oral arguments. Justice Anthony Kennedy is the closest thing the Supreme Court has to a swing vote on abortion, though he almost always swings to the right. Prior to Whole Woman’s Health, Kennedy “voted to strike down only one of the 21 abortion restrictions that have come before the Supreme Court since he became a justice.”

In this case, however, Kennedy voted to stay the Fifth Circuit’s decision, and, at oral argument, he suggested that Keller’s arguments lead to the conclusion that HB2 creates an “undue burden” on the right to choose. Under, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which Kennedy co-wrote, states are forbidden from imposing an undue burden on this right.

So Team Choice has good reason to be optimistic as it enters the most important week for abortion rights in a generation. But the stakes also remain incredibly high, and a loss in this case could cripple what remains of a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy.”

One Comment


  1. Kelly

    June 23, 2016 at 2:15 am

    After watching “Independent Lens” on BBC about the HB2 law in Texas I immediately went to my pc to research this topic…I, myself, being adopted, having had an abortion in my early 20’s and now, a foster parent at one time and, in my 30’s, being married, and a mother of 2, I think, gives me personal enough experience to express my oppinion….That being said I have a question, mabye its not related because I am well aware that MANY religious people feel the need to protest abortion, and even the right to choose…but, my question is, Who is funding these bills/laws? Are the only the religious people, or are they people who stand to ‘make money’ off of ‘more children’; adoption agenceys, orphanages, foster care, even hospitals (since its the price of a luxury car just to give birth in a hospital))? Are any or some of the groups I listed, or similar ones I havent even thought of yet, the ones trying to push these laws (that are hidden in
    the fine print) to make it extremely difficult or shut down abortion clinics???? At the end of the day, NOT ONE PERSON has to agree with abortion BUT, we all live in the United States of America and that gives us the RIGHT to make that personal choice for ourselves and our families/relationships, does it not?????? If we want to pass some laws, why dont we spend some time on the messed up foster care system and the department of children’s services who would rather get paid thousands of dollars instead of placing related children with eligable family or extended family who make a viable effort to get custody and adopt thoese ????children?????? Why aren’t we concerned about kids literally being adopted to non-related strangers for cash in the agencys pocket???? Why cant we be MORE worried about the indepently (breathing, crying, etc outside of the womb)…..ACTUAl LIVING children

Check Also

Editorial: Legislature is unfit for redistricting task

The joint editorial boards of the Charlotte Observer ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

If there is a strategy to President Trump’s administration – and really, who knows if there is? – it [...]

Congressional testimony this week by DuPont, Chemours and 3M was damning Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schul [...]

State environmental regulators will have the power to require most composting facilities to test for [...]

A few short years ago, Lakewood Elementary School in Durham was a low-performing school where only o [...]

It’s September and America’s school children are back in class. They’re greeted every day with the u [...]

Powerful new research confirms numerous benefits of substantially increasing public investments For [...]

The confluence of three essentially unprecedented events combined to make last week an extraordinary [...]

The post The two faces of the NC GOP appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]