NCBC Statement: SCOTUS Refuses to Protect Women from Abortion: June Medical Services v. Russo

In a 5-4 decision, the US Supreme Court, on June 29, 2020, sided with the abortion industry over the protection of women in June Medical Services v. Russo (previously Gee). The case was brought by abortion providers (June Medical Services, LLC, et al.) who opposed a Louisiana law that protects the health of women seeking an abortion. The law required abortionists to have admitting privileges to a local hospital, in the not-unlikely event that a complication occurs.

It is of grave concern that SCOTUS would side with providers, over the well-being of the women the law was created to protect. The NCBC, in its amicus in support of the 2014 Louisiana law, documented the reality of such complications, citing the largest government study since Roe v. Wade. The list of physical and emotional harm, including death of the mother and injured babies born alive, is significant. Yet Chief Justice John Roberts, in his concurrence with the majority, cites a 2016 SCOTUS case overturning a Texas law requiring the abortionist to have hospital admitting privileges. See Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 579 U.S. _ (2016). He claims that precedent dictates that the Louisiana law be overturned, despite the fact that he states: “I joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health and continue to believe that the case [overturning the Texas law] was wrongly decided.”

In other words, bad law should be perpetuated. Moreover, the Texas law was not identical to the Louisiana law. Texas would have required abortion providers not only to have hospital admitting privileges but also to meet ambulatory surgical center standards. There is no more illogical or dangerous foundation to overturn states’ rights than what amounts to “We always have done it this way.” In other words, we always have overlooked the well-being of women seeking an abortion, so why change now?

SCOTUS has determined that the right to an abortion, even when unsafe, supersedes the right to adequate health care. But of grave concern is that this decision indicates that the rights of abortion providers, regardless of any inability to admit their patients to a local hospital when a complication occurs, take precedence over the health of the women whom purportedly they serve. Joseph Meaney, PhD, NCBC President comments: “June 29 was a tragic day for all women because an industry already committed to a culture of death took precedence over women’s health.”