What June Medical Services could mean for abortion access

 

whats-at-stake-scotus-photo-girl-glasses-1024x684.jpg

The announcement that the Supreme Court will be against June Medical Services proves two things about the new US Conservative Court: that it has a total disregard for any permanent legal precedent, and that it clearly sees itself as another partisan body rather than an independent branch of the US government.

While neither revelation is shocking, both of which cause a catastrophe for the future over the right to physical autonomy for those who are able to conceive - especially in the south.

The lawsuit challenging Louisiana's TRAP law that abortion procedures are performed only by doctors with privileges in local hospitals should not have gone to the Supreme Court in the first place. The court ruled in the case of Full Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt in 2016 argued that the request for concessions for abortion providers offered no medical benefit to those seeking to terminate a pregnancy, instead helping close clinics and making it difficult for marginalized populations to access their constitutional rights to terminate a pregnancy.

This was supposed to be the end of any attempt to use admission privileges as a restriction on state-based abortion, but the far-right Fifth Circuit - the same Circuit that supported the Texas requirement to accept privileges even though it closed most state abortion clinics, which was the motive for the Whole Woman’s Health court case - allowed Louisiana to enforce the same law, despite the clear precedent stating the constraint is unlawful.

 

Source: msmagazine.com