
Supreme Court rules Texas abortion clinics can challenge state’s abortion law
the fate of abortion rights
11:30 AM
December 10, 2021
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that abortion providers can moved forward with a challenge to Texas’ extreme abortion law, S.B. 8, though the justices allowed the ban to remain in effect for now, The Wall Street Journal reports.
In an 8-1 opinion, the court concluded that clinics who had sued the state over SB 8 “could proceed with at least part of their case,” Buzzfeed News writes. It did not, however, “reach the core question of whether the Texas law is or is not constitutional.” The justices also rejected a Department of Justice-led effort to challenge the ban, and advised lower courts to consider the matter.
The decision comes not long after the court heard arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case regarding a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. That decision “will affect any future legal fight over S.B. 8,” adds Buzzfeed News.
The only clarity in today’s abortion ruling is about how fractured the Court is on this issue. SB8 remains in effect in Texas. Abortion rights are severely restricted. No reason to believe it won’t get worse when the Court decides Dobbs, where it will reverse or gut Roe v. Wade.
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) December 10, 2021
Texas had hoped it could “insulate” its abortion law from “federal court review by assigning enforcement power to private litigants,” writes the Journal (the ban deputizes citizens to uphold the ban by financially incentivising them to sue anyone who aids or abets an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy). The justices said certain state officials, like the attorney general, cannot be sued, but that abortion providers could sue the head of the state medical board and other licensing authorities in federal court, per the Journal.
Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote for himself as well as liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Stephen Breyer, said the district judge should act quickly, notes The Washington Post.
Sotomayor herself was critical of the decision not to block the law in the first place. “The Court should have put an end to this madness months ago, before S.B.8 first went into effect,” she wrote. “It failed to do so then, and it fails again today.”
Chief Justice Roberts, writing for himself and Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, dissents in part, concluding that “the role of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system … is at stake.” pic.twitter.com/ZH834z1Rsv
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) December 10, 2021
In short, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority allowed a law that flagrantly ignores Supreme Court precedent to go into effect and remain in effect for the past 9 weeks, and even now they’re only providing the possibility of unclear and limited relief going forward.
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) December 10, 2021
SOTOMAYOR: “My disagreement with the Court runs far deeper than a quibble over how many defendants these petitioners may sue. The dispute is over whether States may nullify federal constitutional rights by employing schemes like the one at hand.”
— Ryan Struyk (@ryanstruyk) December 10, 2021
the fate of abortion rights 11:30 AM December 10, 2021 The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that abortion providers can moved forward with a challenge to Texas’ extreme abortion law, S.B. 8, though the justices allowed the ban to remain in effect for now, The Wall Street Journal reports. In an 8-1 opinion, the court…
the fate of abortion rights 11:30 AM December 10, 2021 The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that abortion providers can moved forward with a challenge to Texas’ extreme abortion law, S.B. 8, though the justices allowed the ban to remain in effect for now, The Wall Street Journal reports. In an 8-1 opinion, the court…