Supreme Court Overturns Restrictive Texas Abortion Law

368
SOURCENationofChange

The United States Supreme Court has made a decision to strike down two major provisions of the recent anti-abortion law in Texas.

The bill, House Bill 2 from 2013, originally required that all Texas facilities performing abortions must meet hospital-like standards as well as all doctors to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of an abortion clinic. These were reversed, with Justice Stephen Breyer stating in the majority opinion that they were “unnecessary health regulations” and posed “undue burden” on women’s right to abortion. The vote was ultimately 5-3 in favor of overturning the provisions.

The restrictions on clinics and doctors have become known as “Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers,” or TRAP. Overturning these could have enormous impact all over the country. In addition to Texas, many other states have TRAP laws, with the number of states implementing them growing since 2000:

trap map
14 states currently require abortion providers to have a partnership with a local hospital and 22 require abortion clinics to follow hospital-like standards. Now that SCOTUS has overturned laws in Texas that many other states have implemented it may only be a matter of time before other states see a reversal as well.

FALL FUNDRAISER

If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.

SHARE
Previous articleThe Black Lives Matters Speech You Can’t Miss
Next articleThe Empire’s Fools
Ruth Milka started as an intern for NationofChange in 2015. Known for her thoughtful and thorough approach, Ruth is committed to shedding light on the intersection of environmental issues and their impact on human communities. Her reporting consistently highlights the urgency of environmental challenges while emphasizing the human stories at the heart of these issues. Ruth’s work is driven by a passion for truth and a dedication to informing the public about critical global matters concerning the environment and human rights.

COMMENTS