U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Law
In a major victory for reproductive rights, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a controversial Louisiana law that critics said would have severely limited access to abortion in Louisiana and opened the door to further abortion limitations in Georgia and around the country. Enacted in 2014 by the Louisiana state Legislature, the law would have required physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital.
Legal Background and the High Court Decision
A district court overturned the law in 2017 on the grounds that it offers no benefits to women’s health that justify the burdens it places on abortion access, but a federal appellate court reversed the decision in 2018. On Monday, the high court sided with the lower district court, ruling that its findings and underlying evidence support its conclusion that the law would “drastically reduce” access to abortion and make it impossible for many women to obtain a safe, legal abortion in the state.
The court also noted that the law is “nearly identical” to a similar Texas law that the court struck down in 2016. Writing for the majority, Justice Stephen Breyer said the district court’s findings “mirror” the Whole Woman’s Health case “in every relevant respect and require the same result.” Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan agreed.
The Principle of Stare Decisis
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a concurring opinion, citing the legal doctrine of stare decisis — the principle that obligates courts to follow previous rulings in similar cases. In joining the court’s liberals, he wrote that the question “is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.” Roberts noted that the Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, and therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents.
Comparison of Judicial Positions
| Position | Justices | Legal Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Majority / Concurring | Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, John Roberts | Findings mirror Whole Woman’s Health; obligation of stare decisis. |
| Dissenting | Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh | Filed dissenting opinions against the decision. |
Reactions and Current State of Access
Advocates for reproductive rights cheered the decision, calling it a “win” for Louisianans. “We are relieved that the Supreme Court followed facts and precedent to strike down the state’s harmful anti-abortion law,” Herminia Palacio, president and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, said in a statement. However, she warned that abortion access is still at risk, pointing to a “decades-long, coordinated campaign” to restrict access to abortion across the country.
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, litigated the case on behalf of June Medical Services — the corporate name of the clinic in Shreveport, La., that was at the center of the case. The clinic is one of three such facilities that currently offer abortion services in the state. Statistics show the necessity of such rulings, as in 2017, 89 percent of U.S. counties had no clinics providing abortions, according to the institute.
On the other side, House Republican Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana called the decision “a major step backwards” and vowed to keep fighting, stating, “We will not back down or relent.” An Atlanta federal judge said at a recent hearing he would wait for the court’s decision on the Louisiana law to rule on a request for a permanent injunction against Georgia’s 2019 anti-abortion “heartbeat” law.