197 members of the Senate and House urged the Supreme Court to uphold constitutionally protected reproductive rights in June Medical Services LLC v. Gee
Washington – Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) today led 36 members of the Senate and joined 161 members of the House of Representatives led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Representatives Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Judy Chu (D-Calif.), to file an amicus brief in the case of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee, which is currently pending before the Supreme Court and represents a direct challenge to the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade.
June Medical Services LLC v. Gee addresses the impact of Louisiana’s Act 620, an extreme anti-abortion law that forces abortion providers to obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic. The law provides no medical benefit and would harm patients by stifling access to abortion care. If the law goes into effect, only one clinic and one abortion provider would remain in Louisiana – a state with over 360,000 women of reproductive age.
“Act 620, disguised as an effort to promote women’s health, provides no medical benefit and instead will only create significant obstacles for women seeking abortions,” the lawmakers wrote in the brief.
Lawmakers emphasized in the brief that, just three years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the Court struck down a materially identical Texas law because it imposed significant burdens on abortion access without providing health or safety benefits. Since then, the facts, the law and the Constitution have remained the same. Lawmakers urged the court to uphold its precedent in Roe, Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Whole Woman’s Health and strike down Act 620.
“There is no compelling reason here to upend this settled precedent, and no change of circumstances between Whole Woman’s Health and this action that justifies a different outcome … Laws like Act 620, enacted in defiance of this Court’s constitutional pronouncements, undermine our nation’s confidence in the legislative process and the rule of law,” wrote the lawmakers in the brief.
Read the amicus brief here.