SCOTUS: Strengthening Abortion Rights (June Medical Services, LLC v. Gee)

On June 29, 2020, the Supreme Court made another landmark decision in the case of June Medical Services, LLC v. Gee, strengthening women’s rights to having an abortion. Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the four liberal justices to deliver the 5-4 decision in favor of June Medical Services and abortion. It marks the third major victory for liberals in the Supreme Court this month (the other two being LGBTQ rights and DACA).

Back in 2013, Texas, among other states, passed laws that would require abortion doctors to have admission privileges to a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic, claiming that the patient could be easily rushed into hospital if something went wrong with the abortion. At least one individual who wrote the law admitted that these laws’ ultimate goal was to shut down abortion clinics. The law was challenged in the Supreme Court in the case of Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt and was decided in 2016. The 5-3 decision (one justice had recently died) found that, based on the precedent set by Roe v. Wade, abortion is a constitutional right, thus striking down the Texas law.

Because the state of Louisiana introduced Act 620 in 2014, a similar anti-abortion law, before the case of Whole Woman’s Health (WWH) was decided, several abortion doctors challenged the Act. After WWH struck down the Texas law, the doctors took the law to court and the district court agreed. However, the state took the law to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and they decided that there were “remarkable differences” between this case and WWH, and that “no clinics would likely be forced to close on account of the Act,” thus keeping the law in effect.

The doctors petitioned the Supreme Court to hear their case and oral arguments were heard on March 4, 2020. It was clear at the time that typically conservative Chief Justice John Roberts would be the key vote for this case. Though Roberts usually voted conservative for most issues, he tended to vote in cases to uphold the reputation of the Supreme Court.

The opinion was issued on June 29. It was a 5-4 decision, ruling that the Lousiana law was unconstitutional, overturning the decision of the Fifth Circuit. The four liberal justices wrote, in their opinion, that “the evidence also shows that opposition to abortion played a significant role in some hospitals’ decisions to deny admitting privileges.”

John Roberts (who had voted against abortion in WWH), though agreeing with the four, wrote that while he maintained his dissent in the case of WWH, he joined the majority for this judgment out of respect for the precedent set by WWH. He explained that the law was “just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law,” and so for that reason, “Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedent.”

In Justice Clarence Thomas’s dissent, he wrote that Roe v. Wade “is grievously wrong for many reasons,” because a woman’s right to abortion found “no support in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Others, like Kavanaugh, wrote that there was a need for more evidence to determine the potential impacts on abortion access should the law have been enforced.

This decision strengthens a number of abortion-related cases, such as Roe v. Wade (1973). The case was the first decision that declared abortion a constitutional right and protected a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive governmental restriction. It also strengthened other abortion cases like Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), Stenberg v. Carhart (2000), and Gonzales v, Carhart (2007).

The case comes as a huge relief to pro-choice groups and abortion advocates, as many viewed the precedent set by Roe v. Wade was in jeopardy ever since conservative justices held a majority in the Supreme Court.

What do you think about this case and other abortion-related cases like Roe? Let us know in the comments down below. Stay tuned for more posts like this one.