Subscribe now

Health

Supreme Court strikes down abortion restrictions in Texas

By Aviva Rutkin

27 June 2016

A smiling woman stand outside the court holding a sign that says "Everyone deserves access to safe abortion care"

The Supreme Court decision is being hailed as a major victory for pro-choice advocates

Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

In a major victory for pro-choice advocates, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas abortion law today.

The case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, centred around a Texas law called House Bill 2, or HB2. The law requires abortion clinics to meet the same building standards as outpatient surgery centres – such as having wide hallways and advanced air conditioning and heating systems. It also requires the doctors performing abortions to seek active “admitting privileges” at a hospital within 48 kilometres of their clinic.

The ruling could have reverberations in other states with similar laws on the books, such as Louisiana and Mississippi. Upholding Texas’s HB2 could have bolstered similar efforts in other states, making it much harder for women across the country to seek an abortion.

Proponents of HB2 had said that the restrictions would help protect women’s health.

But pro-choice advocates argued that HB2 effectively limited access to abortions. Since the law passed in 2013, many clinics in the state have been forced to close.

In a 5-3 vote, the Supreme Court ruled to reverse the decision of the Fifth Circuit. The decision, delivered by Justice Stephen Breyer, said that HB2 would place an “undue burden” on women’s constitutional right to seek an abortion, particularly for those who are poor, disadvantaged, or living in rural areas.

The building standards in particular would pose a “substantial obstacle”: “The dramatic drop in the number of clinics means fewer doctors, longer waiting times, and increased crowding,” the decision read.

It also noted that abortions in Texas before HB2 were “extremely safe with particularly low rates of serious complications and virtually no deaths.”

“This is a win for Texans & women across the country who need access to abortion,” tweeted Planned Parenthood shortly after the decision was announced.

“This decisive rejection of clinic shutdown laws marks the most significant abortion-related ruling from the Court in more than two decades,” said the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York City.

This is the most important ruling on abortion rights since Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992, says Maya Manian, a law professor at the University of San Francisco. That ruling said that a law that constitutes an undue burden on abortion rights is unconstitutional – but today’s decision finally more clearly defines what an undue burden means under the law.

“The court explicitly said the undue burden is a balancing act, that courts must independently weigh the benefits of the law against the burdens on women. It puts the burden on the government and the state legislatures that are attacking abortion rights to put forth evidence that these laws actually serve to protect women’s health,” she says.

“This definitely sets a very strong precedent for abortion rights advocates and will lead to courts striking down the sham laws that impose restrictions that go beyond what is needed to ensure patient safety, that are really aimed at closing down clinics and throwing obstacles in the way of women’s access to abortion care.”

“It could also open the door to challenges to other types of abortion restrictions,” such as 24-waiting periods or rules about informed consent, she says.

Topics:

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox! We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

Sign up