Loading...
Loading...
Click here if you don’t see subscription options
Ellen K. BoegelJune 28, 2016

On June 27, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-3 decision in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt declaring unconstitutional a Texas law that required doctors performing abortions to have nearby hospital privileges and abortion clinics to comply with ambulatory surgical center standards. The decision applies directly only to the Texas law, but puts in doubt the constitutionality of similar laws in other states. On June 28, the court issued orders declining requests from Mississippi and Wisconsin to hear appeals from lower court rulings that invalidated similar admitting-privileges laws.

Texas did not directly attack the right to abortion pronounced in Roe v. Wade (1973). Instead it passed health codes that had the purpose and effect of limiting access to abortion. The majority opinion in Whole Woman’s Health, written by Justice Breyer, applies the standard of review set forth in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992). “Unnecessary health regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion impose an undue burden on the right” and are unconstitutional. While the decision is based in part on the “substantial obstacle” caused by the number and location of patients, doctors and clinics impacted, the Texas law was struck down primarily because it placed stricter requirements on abortions than are required for other more dangerous procedures.

The case illustrates the importance of carefully crafted legislation. Justice Alito’s dissent, which is joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas, criticizes the majority for usurping legislative authority, but Texas failed to present evidence that its law would promote better health. The lesson of Whole Women’s Health is that laws applicable only to abortion should be supported by objective medical data and generally consistent with the standard of care required for similarly risky procedures.

A challenge to Louisiana’s admitting-privileges law is currently before the Fifth Circuit, the same court that decided the Texas case and was reversed by the Supreme Court. It is likely the Louisiana law will be declared unconstitutional as admitting-privileges are controlled by individual hospitals, often not based on physician competency and have no demonstrable impact on the provision of safe health care to women seeking abortions.

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt may lead to more litigation as abortion rights advocates challenge waiting provisions and other abortion-specific laws.  

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.

The latest from america

Pope Leo XIV urged new archbishops to help him foster unity in a church rich in diversity. Eight of those new archbishops are from the United States, and they spoke to Catholic News Service about how they can help promote fraternity in today’s polarized world.
This week on “Jesuitical,” Zac and Ashley chat with Christopher White about his new book, ‘Pope Leo XVI: Inside the Conclave and the Dawn of a New Papacy.’
JesuiticalJune 30, 2025
Kerry Weber, incoming president of the Catholic Media Association, and executive editor of America Magazine, speaks June 26, 2025, during the Catholic Media Conference in Phoenix. (OSV News photo/Bob Roller)
Kerry Weber is an executive editor for America. On May 20, 2025, the Catholic Media Association announced that she was elected president,
Grace LenahanJune 30, 2025
"The whole church needs fraternity, which must be present in all of our relationships, whether between lay people and priests, priests and bishops, bishops and the pope," he said during his homily at Mass on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul June 29.