A Win for Women

The United States Supreme Court in a 5 to 3 ruling, struck down Texas abortion restrictions that already caused dozens of clinics across the state to shut down.

Lets take a minute to thank Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who not only joined Justice Stephen Breyer in his majority opinion but wrote her own concurring opinion on unnecessary abortion restrictions. 

RBG wrote:

The Texas law called H. B. 2 inevitably will reduce the number of clinics and doctors allowed to provide abortion services. Texas argues that H. B. 2’s restrictions are constitutional because they protect the health of women who experience complications from abortions. In truth, “complications from an abortion are both rare and rarely dangerous.” Planned Parenthood of Wis., Inc. v. Schimel, 806 F. 3d 908, 912 (CA7 2015). See Brief for American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists et al. as Amici Curiae 6–10 (collecting studies and concluding “[a]bortion is one of the safest medical procedures performed in the United States”); Brief for Social Science Researchers as Amici Curiae 5–9 (compiling studies that show “[c]omplication rates from abortion are very low”). Many medical procedures, including childbirth, are far more dangerous to patients, yet are not subject to ambulatory surgical-center or hospital admitting-privileges requirements. See ante, at 31; Planned Parenthood of Wis., 806 F. 3d, at 921–922. See also Brief for Social Science Researchers 9–11 (comparing statistics on risks for abortion with tonsillectomy, colonoscopy, and in-office dental surgery); Brief for American Civil Liberties Union et al. as Amici Curiae 7 (all District Courts to consider admitting privileges requirements found abortion “is at least as safe as other medical procedures routinely performed in outpatient settings”). Given those realities, it is beyond rational belief that H. B. 2 could genuinely protect the health of women, and certain that the law “would simply make it more difficult for them to obtain abortions.” Planned Parenthood of Wis., 806 F. 3d, at 910. When a State severely limits access to safe and legal procedures, women in desperate circumstances may resort to unlicensed rogue practitioners, faute de mieux, at great risk to their health and safety. See Brief for Ten Pennsylvania Abortion Care Providers as Amici Curiae 17–22. So long as this Court adheres to Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833 (1992), Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers laws like H. B. 2 that “do little or nothing for health, but rather strew impediments to abortion,” Planned Parenthood of Wis., 806 F. 3d, at 921, cannot survive judicial inspection.

The Texas law passed in 2013 required all abortions to take place in surgical centers instead of regular clinics. RBG beautifully crafted her argument by getting straight to the point: Abortions are simply safer than many other simply medical procedures, and Texas does not place similar restrictions on those procedures. 

Whether you are pro-life or not, you cannot deny that abortions happen. They are a fact of our reality. In the words of RBG, "When a State severely limits access to safe and legal procedures, women in desperate circumstances may resort to unlicensed rogue practitioners...at great risk to their health and safety." 

The Supreme Court's decision was the most important decision concerning abortion since Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992, a whopping 24 years ago. Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion that was established in the famous 1973 decision Roe v. Wade. Despite these important decisions, lawmakers have found loopholes by establishing severe restrictions on abortion, endangering the lives of thousands of women. This recent decision is incredibly important as it sets precedent that Texas laws, and thereby similar laws in other states across the nation, are unconstitutional and represent an undue burden upon women. 

The debate over abortion honestly astounds me. Yes, abortion is not pleasant. But let me tell you a little secret: abortions are not fun for any woman who gets one. It's a burden those women will live with for the rest of their lives, but it's their choice. Many of those who oppose abortion also oppose laws limiting gun rights or laws limiting freedom of speech. So why do so many people oppose a government's ability to restrict freedom of choice? No government should have the power to tell any person, including women, what they can and cannot do with their bodies. A government's responsibility is to protect its citizens, not place undue burdens and laws that could put their citizens in danger. This is why the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Texas is so important. Not only did the Supreme Court uphold its own precedent in previous abortion rulings, but it also sent an important message to American women. The Supreme Court, the highest court in the land and the end all-say all of the United States, has declared women's safety and right to choose is important.