Alligator Alcatraz Is Shutting Down
Iranian Regime Leaders Consider Fleeing to Russia As Talks Collapse
The Democrats' Response to Losing at the Virginia Supreme Court Just Escalated
What Happens Now That the South Carolina Supreme Court Overturned the Alex Murdaugh...
Alex Vindman’s Anti-Police Allies, Anti-ICE Views Could Become a Major Problem in Florida
Judge Who Gave Cambridge Gunman a Slap on the Wrist in 2020 Had...
NBC News Tried Invoking 'Experts' to Fearmonger About Hantavirus and It Backfired
Oh, Look: Another Minneapolis Grocery Store Owner Has Been Busted for SNAP Fraud
The Democrats Haven't Learned Their Lesson on Defunding the Police
The Top Democrat in CA's Governor Race Can't Even Handle a Local Interview
John Brennan Says There Is Still a 'Legion' of Intelligence Bureaucrats Working Against...
Spencer Pratt Details What It Was Like to Stand Next to a Real...
Operation Epic Fury May Have Had More Allies Than Anyone Realized
Massie’s Allies Are Weaponizing a VA Disability Rating to Save His Seat
Exclusive: Sen. Rick Scott to Introduce Bill Criminalizing the Doxxing of Federal Law...
Tipsheet

June Medical Services Brings Women's Health to SCOTUS Again

June Medical Services Brings Women's Health to SCOTUS Again
AP Photo/Jeff Roberson

A controversial abortion case is in front of the Supreme Court Wednesday in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo. The case is related to a Louisiana law which requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges to local hospitals, in the event of an emergency. June Medical Services is a piggy-back off of Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which challenged a similar law in Texas. 

Advertisement

Abortion proponents oppose these laws, claiming that they pose an undue burden on women seeking abortions. The purpose of the laws is not to implement barriers to entry for abortion access, but rather to protect the lives of women seeking abortions and to ensure that medical professionals are available. 

Opposition to these laws undermines the left’s argument that abortion is a routine healthcare procedure; if abortion is, indeed, healthcare, why would these abortion advocates not want those who perform abortions to have medical credentials and hospital privileges?

Advertisement

Related:

HEALTH CARE SCOTUS

The high court applied the “substantial burden” test to Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt in 2016. In the majority opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the court said that the health precautions implemented by the law did not outweigh the burden on women seeking abortions. Opponents of Louisiana’s law in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo say that the law conflicts with the precedent of Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt

Chief Justice Roberts joined Justices Thomas and Alito in dissenting in Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt, but with precedent at stake here, his vote, along with Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, will be interesting to watch.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement