Four Reactions from Pro-Life Activists to Supreme Court Blocking Louisiana’s Admitting Privileges Law

Anti-abortion protestors celebrate the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling striking down a Massachusetts law that mandated a protective buffer zone around abortion clinics, outside the Court in Washington, June 26, 2014. | (Photo: Reuters/Jim Bourg)

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June Medical Services v. Russo that a Louisiana state law holding abortion clinics to the same standards as surgical centers was unconstitutional.  

Justice Stephen Breyer announced the judgment, being joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts filed a concurring opinion.

The opinion was built off of an earlier 5-3 Supreme Court ruling known as Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which struck down a similar law in Texas.

“In this case, we consider the constitutionality of a Louisiana statute, Act 620, that is almost word-for-word identical to Texas’ admitting-privileges law,” wrote Breyer.

“Those findings mirror those made in Whole Woman’s Health in every relevant respect and require the same result. We consequently hold that the Louisiana statute is unconstitutional.”

Pro-choice groups celebrated the decision, with organizations like Planned Parenthood hailing it as a victory for women’s health and abortion access.

“Many patients seeking abortion in Louisiana can [breathe] a sigh of relief,” stated Planned Parenthood on Twitter.

“Your ability to access abortion shouldn’t be determined by where you live, how much money you make, and the color of your skin — and we’ll keep working to make that a reality for ALL people.”

However, many pro-life activists and conservatives denounced the decision. Here are four pro-life reactions to the latest Supreme Court decision.

Tony Perkins

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, himself a former Louisiana state legislator who advanced abortion clinic regulations while in office, denounced the Supreme Court ruling.

“With this decision, the Supreme Court has prevented Louisiana from enforcing the law to stop abortionists who regularly deride and violate health standards for women seeking abortion,” said Perkins in a statement.

“Despite the Left’s hysterical fear-mongering, the case was not about the Supreme Court’s self-created ‘right’ to an abortion in Roe. This case was about whether the state has the right to ensure that abortionists who take women’s money also provide for their safety.”

Alexandra DeSanctis

Alexandra DeSanctis of the Ethics and Public Policy Center labeled the Supreme Court decision “another disappointment” for the pro-life movement.

“… the majority has upheld flawed precedent and permitted abortionists to continue benefiting from an enormous loophole, ignoring the health and safety concerns at stake for women seeking a surgical abortion,” wrote DeSanctis in a piece for National Review.

“According to the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, applying that same policy to abortion providers is an unacceptable infringement on a woman’s supposed constitutional right to an abortion — in short, they have widened the gaping loophole that already exists for any policy related abortion, what the late Justice Antonin Scalia called the judiciary’s ‘abortion distortion.’”

Click here to read more.

SOURCE: Christian Post, Michael Gryboski