Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: Texas Abortion Ban Likely Headed to Supreme Court 

WASHINGTON – Following a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to stay a district court decision enjoining S.B. 8, a law that infringes on the constitutional right to a pre-viability abortion, Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following statement:

We are disappointed by the Fifth Circuit’s 2-1 decision to stay Judge Pitman’s thoughtful ruling enjoining S.B. 8.  S.B. 8 is a brazen and unprecedented attack on the supremacy of federal law and the constitutional rights of Texas’s people, and there is no doubt that the United States has the power to sue to defend itself and its people who have been harmed by Texas’s flagrantly unconstitutional law. Indeed, the Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized the federal government’s right to sue to vindicate the public interest, even when Congress has not passed a law explicitly authorizing it to do so.  Moreover, given the unique statutory design of S.B. 8 and its effects on the fundamental right to abortion, recognizing the United States’ right to sue here would vindicate the constitutional principles of separation of powers and federalism—principles that S.B. 8 has undermined.

The Fifth Circuit was wrong to grant the stay today, and we expect the federal government to ask the Supreme Court to lift it.  The Supreme Court should do so promptly.

#

Resources:

CAC case page in United States v. Texas: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/united-states-v-texas-sb8-litigation/

##

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 www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Civil and Human Rights
July 8, 2026

Ruling Away From America’s Second Founding

Slate
CAC’s David H. Gans wrote about the Roberts Court for Slate magazine. Read more in Slate.
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
July 1, 2026

Furthering Inclusive Constitutionalism

Jotwell
Professor Allison Brownell Tirres reviewed recent scholarship on the Black Conventions of Reconstruction by CAC’s David H....
Civil and Human Rights
June 30, 2026

CAC Release: Roberts Court’s Conservative Supermajority Hollows Out Equal Protection Guarantee

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia...
By: David H. Gans, Praveen Fernandes, Joshua Blecher-Cohen
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC

In Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Constitution permits the Department of Labor to use administrative proceedings to impose civil monetary penalties on employers who violate...