Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: Abortion: Process Arguments in Supreme Court Must Not Obscure SB8’s Impact on Real People 

WASHINGTON – Following today’s oral arguments in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson and United States v. Texas, Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

The focus in today’s oral arguments on process questions shouldn’t obscure the impact that the Texas law, SB8, is already having on real people. Moreover, if the Court were to conclude that neither of these cases can go forward, the result would be to endanger people’s ability to exercise all manner of rights. At its heart, these cases are about whether states can nullify constitutional rights and then make it effectively impossible to get judicial review. The answer to that question is plainly no. There were signs that some of the conservative justices, including Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh, are wrestling with these issues. Indeed, Justice Kavanaugh seemed to suggest in his questioning that SB 8’s model could be used by states to flout other bedrock rights. The stakes of this case are enormous: if the Court fails to stop SB 8 now it will cause immediate, real harm, and set a dangerous precedent for the right to access abortion across the nation and Americans’ ability to enjoy other fundamental rights.



CAC case page in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson:

CAC case page in United States v. Texas:

“If Supreme Court Rules Neither Abortion Providers nor DOJ Can Challenge S.B. 8, No Right Is Safe.,” CAC Blog, Miriam Becker-Cohen, October 29, 2021:


Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at


More from Civil and Human Rights