Here is a post from Teresa Collett (as posted on the Mirror of Justice blog by Greg Sisk) concerning the Whole Woman’s Health case (the Texas abortion case currently pending before the United States Supreme Court).
On March 2 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, a challenge to a Texas statute requiring abortion clinics meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers and doctors providing abortions have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic. Plaintiffs claim that enforcement of these requirements will cause the closing of 75% of all abortion clinics in the state, which should be considered an undue burden per se. They also argue that the requirements do little or nothing to advance the health and safety of women, given the comparative safety of abortion over carrying a child to term. Texas responds that two to three Texas women end up in emergency rooms every week due to complications from abortion. The requirements advance women’s safety by assuring that abortions occur in facilities that are equipped to respond to complications that arise during an abortion, and the admitting privileges provide a second check of a doctor’s competency as well as promoting continuity of care should a woman need hospitalization,
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, several legal scholars, a variety of medical associations, University Faculty for Life, and the Prolife Center at the University of St. Thomas lined up on the side of Texas in their amicus briefs. These briefs are available on <www.scotusblog.com> , ABA Supreme Court preview, and the Texas Attorney General website at https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/hb2/texas-women.