Civil and Human Rights

Victory: Abortion Clinic Shutdown Laws Struck Down

Washington, DC – On news this morning that the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt – striking down Texas’ abortion clinic shutdown laws as unconstitutional – Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

 

“Justice Breyer’s majority opinion powerfully demonstrates the true purpose and onerous burden that laws like these in Texas would have placed on the right of women to access abortion – a liberty protected by the Constitution and the Court’s precedents. In setting aside such clinic shutdown laws, Breyer correctly wrote for the Court, ‘[T]he challenged provisions close most of the abortion facilities in Texas’ and  ‘vastly increase the obstacles confronting women seeking abortions in Texas without providing any benefit to women’s health capable of withstanding any meaningful scrutiny.’  

 

“It is also interesting to note” Wydra continued, “as we anticipated in our brief, that Justices Kennedy and Ginsburg found common ground in joining today’s majority opinion. As the Court’s leading thinkers on issues of access to abortion services, their approach to questions of individual liberty and equality clearly weighed heavily against regulations like the Texas laws struck down today.”

 

#

 

Resources:

 

CAC “friend of the court” brief in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt: http://theusconstitution.org/cases/whole-woman%E2%80%99s-health-v-hellerstedt-us-sup-ct 

 

“The Supreme Court’s Choice on Abortion,” David H. Gans, The New Republic, March 2, 2016: https://newrepublic.com/article/131009/supreme-courts-choice-abortion 

 

“Faulty Federalism, Texas Edition: How Texas Hopes to Gut the Right to Abortion,” David H. Gans, Balkinization, February 29, 2016: http://balkin.blogspot.com/2016/02/faulty-federalism-texas-edition-how.html 

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Voting Rights and Democracy
March 24, 2025

The Supreme Court Just Put the Voting Rights Act in Its Crosshairs Again

Slate
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Louisiana v. Callais, an important battle over...
By: Anna Jessurun
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Cristosal Human Rights v. Marocco

In Cristosal Human Rights v. Marocco, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is considering whether the Trump administration’s unilateral decision to defund and dismantle the Inter-American Foundation violates federal law and...
Immigration and Citizenship
March 24, 2025

RELEASE: Immigration Provision at Heart of Today’s Oral Argument Should Not Be a Jurisdictional Trap for Unwary Immigrants

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court today in Riley v. Bondi,...
Voting Rights and Democracy
March 24, 2025

RELEASE: Supreme Court Hears Challenge to State Efforts to Remedy Voting Rights Act Violation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Louisiana v....
Civil and Human Rights
March 26, 2025

Debate over transgender rights grows more fraught in new Trump era

The Christian Science Monitor
Actions by the Trump administration have been pushing back on transgender inclusion, amid sharp public...
Access to Justice
March 19, 2025

Fight over False Claims Act whistleblower provision heats up on appeal

Reuters
At first glance, it might seem far-fetched to suggest a whistleblower law that’s been on...