June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

Post Reply
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9976
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 1 dog, 1 cat, and 1 horse, 4 granddogs, and one grandcat.

June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#1

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

Sekrit Stuffs!
Steve Vladeck

@steve_vladeck
The only reason why the Louisiana law is currently on hold is because Chief Justice Roberts _already_ joined the four progressive Justices to stay the Fifth Circuit decision that would’ve allowed the law to go into effect.

Given that, this would hardly be a surprising result...
Mark Joseph Stern
@mjs_DC
· 1h
Just got out of arguments in June Medical Services, the Supreme Court’s big abortion case. I think there is actually a chance Chief Justice Roberts will apply Whole Women’s Health and strike down Louisiana’s admitting privileges requirement.

Roberts repeatedly asked how the admitting privileges requirement could benefit Louisiana women HERE if it didn’t benefit Texas women in WWH. Asked a variation on that question several times. Louisiana didn’t give a good answer. Also Louisiana’s solicitor general was awful.
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment:
The 19th Amendment was first introduced to Congress in 1878, yet it was not approved by Congress until 1919 – 41 years later.
- https://legaldictionary.net/19th-amendment/

User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 4921
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh PA

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#2

Post by AndyinPA »

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 12:49 pm
Sekrit Stuffs!
Steve Vladeck

@steve_vladeck
The only reason why the Louisiana law is currently on hold is because Chief Justice Roberts _already_ joined the four progressive Justices to stay the Fifth Circuit decision that would’ve allowed the law to go into effect.

Given that, this would hardly be a surprising result...
Mark Joseph Stern
@mjs_DC
· 1h
Just got out of arguments in June Medical Services, the Supreme Court’s big abortion case. I think there is actually a chance Chief Justice Roberts will apply Whole Women’s Health and strike down Louisiana’s admitting privileges requirement.

Roberts repeatedly asked how the admitting privileges requirement could benefit Louisiana women HERE if it didn’t benefit Texas women in WWH. Asked a variation on that question several times. Louisiana didn’t give a good answer. Also Louisiana’s solicitor general was awful.


Is this the case that some national attorney's association just wrote an argument (brief, letter?) about, saying that this was decided law a few years ago and the SC should not take it up as it is settled law?

I saw something yesterday, but I don't remember where. :confused:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine

User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 11401
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#3

Post by Sugar Magnolia »

AndyinPA wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:42 pm
Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 12:49 pm
Sekrit Stuffs!
Steve Vladeck

@steve_vladeck
The only reason why the Louisiana law is currently on hold is because Chief Justice Roberts _already_ joined the four progressive Justices to stay the Fifth Circuit decision that would’ve allowed the law to go into effect.

Given that, this would hardly be a surprising result...




Is this the case that some national attorney's association just wrote an argument (brief, letter?) about, saying that this was decided law a few years ago and the SC should not take it up as it is settled law?

I saw something yesterday, but I don't remember where. :confused:
That may have been Mississippi's law that is currently wending its way through the system. The 15 week ban was shut down so they came back with a 6 week ban.

Yeah, we're smert.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 26588
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#4

Post by RTH10260 »

Schumer warns Kavanaugh and Gorsuch they will 'pay the price'
BY J. EDWARD MORENO - 03/04/20 04:53 PM EST

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the two Trump-appointed conservative Supreme Court justices “will pay the price” for “awful decisions” in abortion rights cases.

Schumer addressed justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh in front of a crowd at the Supreme Court and appeared to threaten Senate Republicans and the administration if the court voted in favor of the Louisiana abortion law that could result in the court revisiting the protections provided in the Roe v. Wade ruling.

“I want to tell you, Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch, you have unleashed a whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer said as the judges hear opening arguments on the case Wednesday. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”



https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/486 ... -the-price

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 41348
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#5

Post by Addie »

Talking Points Memo
SCOTUS Liberals Take Last Stand In The Face Of Almost Certain Abortion Case Defeat

The liberal contingent of the Supreme Court sounded off during Wednesday’s oral arguments about the legality of Louisiana’s abortion regulation law, which is nearly identical to a Texas law the court struck down two years ago.

What’s changed since then is the composition of the Court, which has shifted to the right since Justice Anthony Kennedy’s 2018 departure. Kennedy had joined the liberals in ruling against the Texas law in the 2016 case Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.

But Wednesday, despite the almost certain coming loss for abortions rights advocates at the hands of Justice Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — along with the old conservative guard — the liberal justices spent much of the hour-long hearing jumping up and down on the state’s arguments.

Justice Stephen Breyer, who voted to strike down the Texas law, got particularly exasperated as the proceedings continued, bashing Department of Justice Deputy Solicitor Jeffrey Wall for helping bring a case before the court that they virtually already decided.

“If you really want us to go back and reexamine this, let’s go back and reexamine Marbury v. Madison!” he exclaimed, referring to the Court’s landmark 1803 decision. “You have good arguments — but why depart from what’s pretty clear precedent?”

“I don’t want to go back to 1789,” Wall responded before Breyer cut in: “You want to go back 40 years!” he said, presumably referencing Roe v. Wade, the decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
Adding:
Slate: Anti-Abortion Advocates Lied So Poorly That John Roberts May Side With the Liberals

June Medical proves that Louisiana’s law isn’t about protecting women’s health.
"The very least you can do in your life is to figure out what you hope for." - Barbara Kingsolver

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 41348
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#6

Post by Addie »

New York Times: Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Restrictions ...

The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. voting with the court’s four-member liberal wing but not adopting its reasoning. The chief justice said respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

The case was the court’s first on abortion since President Trump’s appointments of two justices shifted the court to the right.

The Louisiana law, which was enacted in 2014, requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
Adding:
ABC News: Supreme Court hands down major decision reaffirming abortion rights in Louisiana case

The case, June Medical Services v. Russo, has major implications.
"The very least you can do in your life is to figure out what you hope for." - Barbara Kingsolver

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 17092
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#7

Post by ZekeB »

Those right wingers are going to be calling for Chief Justice Robert's removal in 3.. 2.. 1.
Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 4921
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh PA

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#8

Post by AndyinPA »

I said on another thread, this is about the Robert's Court, not about conservatism. He's not Bill Barr. He cares about his legacy.

He's tying himself into knots trying to explain it.
In an ironic turn, Roberts concurred with the Louisiana decision due to the precedent established by the Texas decision — which he dissented from.

“I joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health and continue to believe that the case was wrongly decided,” Roberts wrote. “The question today however is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.”

“The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike,” he added. “The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents.”

Roberts made clear, though, that he was not tying his decision to any political preference. Rather, he hung it all on stare decisis, the notion of precedent, saying that he also would be loathe to strike down an abortion regulation absent proof that it hinders a woman’s ability to get the procedure done.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/supr ... truck-down
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 17092
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#9

Post by ZekeB »

Iowa just passed a law last week requiring a 24 hour waiting period. Perhaps now these states will learn that laws weakening Roe v Wade are a waste of time.
Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

User avatar
DejaMoo
Posts: 5531
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:19 pm
Occupation: Agent of ZOG

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#10

Post by DejaMoo »

ZekeB wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:09 pm
Iowa just passed a law last week requiring a 24 hour waiting period. Perhaps now these states will learn that laws weakening Roe v Wade are a waste of time.
They're never a waste of time for the GOP. Any measure attacking the right to abortion is priceless in terms of recruiting and fundraising for the Republican Party. If they actually succeeded in their claimed goal of outlawing abortion, they'd lose that tool. Who knows - perhaps they're deliberately writing bad legislation and counting on the courts to overturn it each time.
I've heard this bull before.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28694
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#11

Post by bob »

1. The Chief's concurrance essentially says, "Try again, but with feeling." Stare decisis can be honored if the precedent can be distinguished away.

2. The Chief's concurrence also (implicitly) says, "Try again, after RBG is off the court."
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6232
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#12

Post by Maybenaut »

Offtopic, but only kind of. I’m seeing a lot of posts on social media about how awesome Roberts is by legitimizing his Court through the invocation of stare decisis.

But that’s a double-edged sword. You can’t really have a conversation about stare decisis without talking about McKleskey v. Kemp. In that case a study conducted by Prof. Baldus at Emory University showed that even after accounting for all the things that could legitimately matter, Black defendants were sentenced to death in Georgia at an alarmingly disproportionate rate. The Court said, in essence, that the appearance of racial bias in the death penalty process is inevitable, shrugged, and said, “Whatta ya gonna do?” Well, eliminating the possibility that someone would be executed based on the color of his skin springs immediately to mind, but that’s just me. Anyhoo, the Court said that the accused must prove that the systemic racial bias is intentional even if the defense can show disparate treatment.

I’d hate like hell for a future death row inmate to lose a racial bias challenge to the death penalty because of stare decisis. And what concerns me about the abortion case is that Roberts is setting the stage for such a thing to happen.
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 8658
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#13

Post by neonzx »

https://mobile.twitter.com/Mike_Pence/s ... 3931225089

Mike Pence@Mike_Pence
After today’s disappointing decision by SCOTUS, one thing is clear: We need more Conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court. #FourMoreYears
Wow, surprised Pence is so disappointed.

User avatar
Chilidog
Posts: 10978
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:36 am

Re: June Medical Services v. State of Louisiana - Abortion

#14

Post by Chilidog »

The one question I would like yo get an honest answer from Roberts is:

"Do you still believe that institutional racism no longer exists in the US?"

Post Reply

Return to “Courts, Law, and Legal Issues”