In a decision that could reverberate in Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas law that clamped down on abortion access because it âunduly burden(s)â womenâs reproductive rights.
The court announced its 5-3 decision Monday in Whole Womanâs Health v. Hellerstedt. It was one of three final opinions released before the justices go on summer recess.
The Texas law mirrored a measure passed in Florida this year. It too requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and requires clinics where they work to be set up and regulated similarly to outpatient surgical centers.
But state Sen. Kelli Stargel said the Florida law, which takes effect Friday, has been unfairly compared to Texasâ: âTheyâre not the same.â
Stargel, the Lakeland Republican who backed the new provisions, said one difference is requiring physicians to have admitting privileges at a hospital âwithin reasonable proximity to the clinic,â not within a set distance.
But Adam Levine, an adjunct professor at Stetson University College of Law, said the courtâs ruling will give impetus to groups, like Planned Parenthood, seeking to overturn the Florida law.
âIf the intent or effect of a law is to place a substantial burden on getting a pregnancy termination, then itâs not permissible,â said Levine, an obstetrician-turned-attorney. But even if âthe provisions are determined to be similar enough, they can be enforced by the state until someone challenges them.â
Further, Levine thinks challengers seeking a preliminary court order preventing the lawâs enforcement would have to argue theyâre âlikely to prevail on the merits.â Because of the Hellerstedt decision, âsomeone trying to prevent both the physician privilege requirement and the facility regulation requirement should prevail,â he said.
Damien Filer, a spokesman for Planned Parenthood in Florida, said, âwhile the Courtâs ruling will have nationwide effect, no other state laws will be immediately struck down.â
He added, âIt is possible that the standard the Court sets could be used to challenge restrictions in other states,â but would not say whether his group plans a legal challenge.
Mary Ziegler, a Florida State University law professor who studies reproductive health issues, said she thought the laws were âsimilar enoughâ that âat a minimum, (Mondayâs decision)Â casts serious doubt on the constitutionality of all laws like it.â
She added that the decision also made clear legislatures canât just say theyâre passing abortion restriction measure to benefit womenâs health, âthey have to show that through some proof.â
Meantime, former Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis told MSNBCÂ she was âoverjoyedâ and âfighting back tearsâ following the Supreme Court decision.
Davis, a Democrat who unsuccessfully ran for Texas governor against Republican Greg Abbott in 2014, had filibustered another bill for 11 hours that would have restricted access to abortions.
âItâs incredible news for the women of Texas,â Davis said. âItâs incredible news for the women throughout this country.â
The courtâs opinion was split along the usual ideological lines. The majority included JusticesStephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Anthony Kennedy, the courtâs swing vote. The dissenters were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
___
Editorâs note: This story will be updated throughout the day. A look at Florida political reaction to the ruling is here.Â