Ruling Could Set Back Abortion Opponents’ State-Based Strategy
Anti-abortion activists have been focusing on moving regulations through state legislatures to limit abortion access. But Monday's ruling could be a major blow to that strategy.
The New York Times:
Abortion Ruling Could Create Waves Of Legal Challenges
From Texas to Alabama to Wisconsin, more than a dozen Republican-run states in recent years have passed laws requiring that abortion clinics have hospital-grade facilities or use doctors with admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Now, Monday’s Supreme Court ruling ... will quickly reverberate across the country. (Eckholm, 6/27)
The Associated Press:
Supreme Court Ruling Imperils Abortion Laws In Many States
According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which led the legal challenge, similar admitting-privilege requirements are in effect in Missouri, North Dakota and Tennessee, and are on hold in Alabama, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Wisconsin. The hospital-like outpatient surgery standards are in place in Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania and Virginia, and are on hold in Tennessee, according to the center. Monday's ruling is likely to remove an ongoing threat to the only abortion clinic still operating in Mississippi. (Crary, 6/28)
Modern Healthcare:
Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Will Bring More Fights Over Limits And Access
The ruling won't stop attempts to limit abortion around the country, but it is a serious blow to those efforts, said Michael Dell, a partner at Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel who filed a brief in the case on behalf of 10 women who've had abortions, siding with the abortion clinics. (Schencker, 6/27)
The Wall Street Journal:
Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Scrambles Front Line Of Access Fight
Nancy Northup, head of the Center for Reproductive Rights that brought the Texas case, described the opinion as a “game-changer” in her organization’s efforts to challenge state laws. (Radnofsky, 6/27)
The Boston Globe:
Supreme Court Blocks An Entire Anti-Abortion Strategy
The full reach of this ruling is still unclear, however. Moving forward, many abortion restrictions will still need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. States whose restrictions echo those in Texas are likely to face new lawsuits. But other approaches — like mandatory waiting periods — have previously received the court’s blessing. (Horowitz, 6/27)
Los Angeles Times:
Supreme Court Ruling Is Likely To Change The Landscape Of 'Abortion Desert'
About half the women in the South live in counties without abortion clinics, as do 53% of women in the Midwest, compared with 38% nationwide, according to the most recent study by the Guttmacher Institute, which advocates for reproductive rights. Since the Texas law passed, many women without clinics nearby or whose clinics had long waits have paid to travel to have abortions in neighboring states. Advocates said there’s a pressing need to reopen clinics that serve women in remote western cities such as Lubbock, Midland and San Angelo. (Hennessy-Fiske, 6/27)
Media outlets from the states report on the expected ramifications of the ruling on local laws —
The Philadelphia Inquirer:
How Supreme Court's Texas Decision May Affect Pa.'s Abortion Law
Monday's ruling in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt may have implications for numerous other states. Pennsylvania is among five states that require abortion facilities to be on a par medically with outpatient surgical centers, and four states require hospital admitting privileges, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research center that supports abortion rights. Many more states impose varying restrictions. (McCullough, 6/28)
The Columbus Dispatch:
What The Supreme Court Ruling On Abortion Restrictions Means For Ohio
In a major victory for abortion rights advocates, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Texas abortion law, a decision likely to trigger lawsuits in Ohio challenging similar restrictions. Hundreds of abortion rights supporters outside the court erupted in cheers as the justices handed down the 5-3 ruling with the majority saying the Texas law placed a “substantial obstacle” in the path of a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. The justices brushed aside arguments that the law was medically necessary to protect a woman’s health. (Torry, Candisky and Maier, 6/27)
Cleveland Plain Dealer:
Abortion Rights Activists Will Challenge Ohio Laws After U.S. Supreme Court Ruling
Cincinnati-area abortion rights lawyer Jennifer Branch expects the ruling will be used to attack written hospital transfer agreements the state now requires abortion providers to have with nearby hospitals. She said the Ohio Department of Health's requirement that four doctors at each clinic need hospital privileges makes the state's policy more restrictive than the Texas law that the U.S. Supreme court overturned on Monday. (Eaton, 6/27)
New Hampshire Union Leader:
Abortion Law Decision Draws Mixed Reaction In NH
New Hampshire reaction to the Supreme Court striking down a Texas abortion law fell along party lines and reflected the heated election year underway. The court’s 5-3 decision comes two days before the New Hampshire Executive Council votes on $549,000 in funding for Planned Parenthood of Northern New England clinics.
Orlando Sentinel:
Supreme Court Abortion Decision Will Have Little Immediate Effect In Florida
A wide-ranging Florida anti-abortion law will have its own day in court, though the Supreme Court's ruling against a Texas anti-abortion law "sets a precedent" according to Planned Parenthood, which is suing over Florida's law. (Sweeney, 6/27)
New Orleans Times-Picayune:
Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Has Implications For Louisiana
Abortion rights advocates are hailing the Supreme Court's ruling Monday (June 27) overturning a Texas law requiring abortion doctors to hold hospital admitting privileges as "historic" and a "game-changer" with substantial implications for Louisiana. (Litten, 6/27)
The Charlotte Observer:
Abortion Ruling To Have No Direct Effect On NC Laws
The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Texas law that was blamed for the closing of 3 out of 4 abortion clinics in the state. The decision sends a warning shot to other conservative states, as well, that cite medical safety issues in adding restrictions on abortion clinics. (Doyle, 6/27)
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Ruling Signals Court Will Strike Down Wisconsin Abortion Restrictions
The Supreme Court on Monday struck down restrictions on Texas abortion clinics and doctors and signaled that it would soon do the same in Wisconsin, delivering its most significant ruling on the procedure in a generation. ...The ruling has big implications beyond the Lone Star State in states like Wisconsin, which passed similar though less extensive limits on abortion in 2013 only to see them struck down by the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Justice Stephen Breyer directly cited the lawsuit over Wisconsin's law and those in other states in his majority opinion in the Texas decision Monday. (Stein, 6/27)
St. Louis Public Radio:
Supreme Court Action Likely To Toss Missouri's Abortion Restrictions Back Into Court
Some of Missouri’s restrictive laws governing abortion clinics will likely face a legal challenge as a result of today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision knocking down similar restrictions in Texas. But abortion-rights supporters and opponents in Missouri agree that it’s “too soon to tell’’ the specific effects of the high court’s 5-3 ruling on the Show-Me state, which long has had some of the nation’s strictest abortion laws. (Mannies and Margolies, 6/27)
The Des Moines Register:
Court Ruling 'Devastating' To Iowa Anti-Abortion Forces
The leader of an Iowa anti-abortion group called the ruling "devastating" and predicted that it will hurt efforts to restrict abortions here. Meanwhile, a senior official with Planned Parenthood of the Heartland applauded the decision, saying it will protect Iowa women’s constitutional right to safe, legal abortions. (Leys and Petroski, 6/27)
