June Medical Services v. Russo
What's at Stake
Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital conflicts with the Supreme Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, where the Court invalidated a similar statute in Texas in 2016.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld Louisiana’s law requiring abortion providers have admitting privileges at a local hospital. In our amicus brief, the ACLU argues that the U.S. Supreme Court must overturn the lower court’s decision because the Louisiana law is identical to a Texas statute that the Supreme Court struck down just three years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 136 S.Ct. 2292 (2016). In that case, the justices ruled that Texas’s law was unconstitutional because it provided no health benefits but closed clinics and cut off access to abortionWe argue that the Louisiana law now before the Court is just as medically unnecessary, and just as harmful. It would force most abortion clinics in the state to close their doors and block people from accessing an abortion. Judges around the country have found that similar laws would shutter abortion clinics and prevent people from being able to access an abortion.
June Medical Services v. Gee Amicus Brief
Date Filed: 12/02/2019
ACLU Statement on Supreme Court Ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo
ACLU Urges Supreme Court to Follow Precedent and Strike Down Medically Unnecessary Abortion Restriction