Boston Herald

Court throws out abortion restrictio­n

Louisiana law stricken down that required hospital access

-

WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Louisiana law regulating abortion clinics, reassertin­g a commitment to abortion rights over fierce opposition from dissenting conservati­ve justices in the first big abortion case of the Trump era.

Chief Justice John Roberts and his four more liberal colleagues ruled that a law that requires doctors who perform abortions must have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals violates abortion rights the court first announced in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973.

The outcome is far from the last word on the decades-long fight over abortion with dozens of state-imposed restrictio­ns winding their way through the courts.

But the Supreme Court decision was a surprising defeat for abortion opponents, who thought that a new conservati­ve majority with two of President Trump’s appointees on board would start chipping away at abortion access.

The key vote belonged to Roberts, who had always voted against abortion rights before, including in a 2016 case in which the court struck down a Texas law that was virtually identical to the one in Louisiana.

The chief justice explained that he continues to think the Texas case was wrongly decided, but believes it’s important for the court to stand by its prior decisions.

“The result in this case is controlled by our decision four years ago invalidati­ng a nearly identical Texas law,” Roberts wrote. He did not join the opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer for the other liberals in Monday’s decision, and his position left abortion-rights supporters more relieved than elated.

The case was the third in two weeks in which Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee, joined the court’s liberals in the majority. One of the earlier decisions preserved the legal protection­s and work authorizat­ion for 650,000 immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children. The other recent case that unexpected­ly went to the liberals extended federal employment­discrimina­tion protection­s to LGBT Americans, a decision that Justice Neil Gorsuch also joined and wrote.

In dissent on Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “Today a majority of the Court perpetuate­s its ill-founded abortion jurisprude­nce by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdicti­on.”

Trump’s two high-court picks, Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, were in dissent, along with Samuel Alito.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany criticized the decision.

“In an unfortunat­e ruling today, the Supreme Court devalued both the health of mothers and the lives of unborn children by gutting Louisiana’s policy that required all abortion procedures be performed by individual­s with admitting privileges at a nearby hospital,” McEnany said of the ruling.

 ?? Ap pHotos ?? RULING GOES AGAINST PROTESTERS’ WISHES: Anti-abortion protesters wait outside the Supreme Court for a decision Monday in Washington, D.C., on the Louisiana case, Russo v. June Medical Services LLC. The ruling said the state couldn’t restrict abortions to doctors who had admitting privileges at hospitals.
Ap pHotos RULING GOES AGAINST PROTESTERS’ WISHES: Anti-abortion protesters wait outside the Supreme Court for a decision Monday in Washington, D.C., on the Louisiana case, Russo v. June Medical Services LLC. The ruling said the state couldn’t restrict abortions to doctors who had admitting privileges at hospitals.
 ??  ?? MAKING A POINT: Terrisa Bukovinac, founder of Pro-Life San Francisco, holds a model of a fetus as she and other anti-abortion protesters wait outside the Supreme Court for a decision Monday.
MAKING A POINT: Terrisa Bukovinac, founder of Pro-Life San Francisco, holds a model of a fetus as she and other anti-abortion protesters wait outside the Supreme Court for a decision Monday.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States