MRL and National Right to Life Say U.S. Supreme Court Wrong in June Medical, L.L.C. v. Russo Missouri Right to Life with National Right to Life and with pro-lifers from around the nation, are very disappointed in today’s decision by the US Supreme Court. Today, in Louisiana, patient safety has taken a backseat to common sense restrictions enacted by a state legislature. It is unfortunate that Chief Justice Roberts decided to change his vote from the Texas case the Court used as precedent. _________ WASHINGTON— Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Louisiana’s 2014 “Unsafe Abortion Protection Act” in a 5-4 decision. The law was before the High Court in June Medical Services, L.L.C. v. Russo. “We are extremely disappointed that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Louisiana’s 2014 ‘Unsafe Abortion Protection Act,’” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Louisiana’s law leaves women vulnerable.” President Trump’s appointees Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch joined Justices Alito and Thomas in dissenting from the decision and voting to uphold Louisiana’s protective law. "We are pleased that the two Justices appointed by President Trump voted to protect women and to uphold the Louisiana pro-life law. However, Chief Justice Roberts' vote is a big disappointment. He is apparently adhering to an extreme view of stare decisis,” said James Bopp, Jr., general counsel for National Right to Life. “This decision demonstrates how difficult it is to drain the D.C. swamp and how important it is that President Trump gets re-elected so that he may be able to appoint more pro-life Justices.” Louisiana's 2014 “Unsafe Abortion Protection Act” or Act 620 required that abortionists have admitting privileges to a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic where the abortion is performed. While comparisons were made with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt, Louisiana’s law only sought to extend a requirement to include abortionists that was already required of all other physicians in outpatient surgery settings. “Pro-abortion groups have made it clear that they care more about their bottom line than the women they claim to serve,” said Tobias. “If the abortion industry were really concerned about women, they would want an admitting privileges requirement in order to reassure women that they are getting good care.” Missouri Right to Life | Post Office Box 651, Jefferson City, MO 65102 Unsubscribe [email protected] Update Profile | About Constant Contact Sent by [email protected] in collaboration with Try email marketing for free today!