Last month, the United States Supreme Court ruled on two cases that we have been watching. (Original blog post: March 5, 2020.) Below are the judgments rendered.
June Medical Services v. Russo
In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court decided that a Louisiana state law requiring abortion clinics to have the same standards as surgical centers was unconstitutional.
Planned Parenthood hailed this decision as a victory for women’s health and abortion access. “Your ability to access abortion shouldn’t be determined by where you live, how much money you make, and the color of your skin – we’ll keep working to make that a reality for ALL people,” stated Planned Parenthood on Twitter.
Justice Stephen Breyer referenced the precedent from past abortion cases: Health regulations that place an “undue burden” on abortion access are unconstitutional. Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Justice Thomas wrote, “Our abortion precedents are grievously wrong and should be overruled.”
World Magazine reports Justice Gorsuch laid out the health concerns women faced in Louisiana. He listed abortionists’ health violations such as failing to sterilize equipment, not monitoring patients’ vital signs, and unauthorized staff improperly administering medications. They reported that June Medical had hired people ill-qualified to perform abortions, including a radiologist and an ophthalmologist.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins denounced the ruling, “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.”
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.
Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue
In another 5-4 decision, the U. S. Supreme Court struck down Montana’s Blaine Amendment which barred public aid from going to educational institutions “controlled in whole or in part by any church, sect, or denomination.”
Those who support school choice and tuition vouchers celebrated this decision. Jeanne Allen, founder and chief executive of the Center for Educational Reform, called it “an extraordinary victory for student achievement, parental control, equality in educational opportunities, and First Amendment rights.”
Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch, delivered the opinion of the court. “Montana’s no-aid provision bars religious schools from public benefits solely because of religious character of the schools. The provision also bars parents who wish to send their children to a religious school from those same benefits, again solely because of the religious character of the school. A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious,” Roberts wrote.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor dissented in this ruling.