An Anti-ICE Activist Tried Interfering With an Arrest in California. Guess What Happened...
CNN Hosts Peddled a Lie About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting..and DHS Wasn't Gonna...
NYC Official Who Mocked Charlie Kirk's Death Is In Deep Trouble
Zohran Mamdani’s Exploitation of Black Voters Represents Everything I Hate About Democrats
Watch Tim Walz Make a Fool Out of Himself Yet Again
No More Taxes Until the Fraud Stops
She's At It Again: Candace Owens Claims Charlie Kirk Was a Time Traveler
Border Czar Tom Homan Warns Anti-ICE Rhetoric Could Spark More Bloodshed
Gutfeld Eviscerates Jessica Tarlov for Defending Protesters Harassing ICE Agents
‘They Are Killing Their Own Children’: Iranian Commander’s Daughter Speaks Out Amid Nation...
Trump Threatens to Tariff Countries Opposing His Effort to Control Greenland
DOJ Reportedly Investigating Tim Walz, Jacob Frey Over Impeding ICE
COVID Cash Heist: Michigan Woman Gets 27 Months Behind Bars for $3M Scheme
Five Florida Eye Practices to Pay Nearly $6M to Settle False Claims Act...
Law Enforcement Arrests Alleged Gang Member Who Stole Weapon, Vandalized ICE Vehicle
Tipsheet

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