WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court stopped Louisiana from enforcing new regulations on abortion clinics in a test of the conservative court's views on abortion rights.
The justices said by a 5-4 vote late Thursday that they will not allow the state to put into effect a law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court's four liberals in putting a hold on the law, pending a full review of the case.
President Donald Trump's two Supreme Court appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, were among the four conservative members of the court who would have allowed the law to take effect.
Kavanaugh wrote a dissenting opinion in which he said the court's action was premature because the state had made clear it would allow abortion providers an additional 45 days to obtain admitting privileges before it started enforcing the law.
If the doctors succeed, they can continue performing abortions, he said. If they fail, they could return to court, Kavanaugh said.
The law is very similar to a Texas measure the justices struck down three years ago. Roberts dissented in that case.
But the composition of the court has changed since then, with Kavanaugh replacing Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted to strike down the Texas law. Trump had pledged during the campaign to appoint "pro-life" justices, and abortion opponents are hoping the more conservative bench will be more open to upholding abortion restrictions.
Louisiana abortion providers and a district judge who initially heard the case said one or maybe two of the state's three abortion clinics would have to close under the new law. There would be at most two doctors who could meet its requirements, they said.
But the federal appeals court in New Orleans rejected those claims, doubting that any clinics would have to close and saying the doctors had not tried hard enough to establish relationships with local hospitals.
In January, the full appeals court voted 9-6 not to get involved in the case, setting up the Supreme Court appeal.
The law had been scheduled to take effect Monday, but Justice Samuel Alito delayed the effective date at least through Thursday to give the justices more time. He and Justice Clarence Thomas were the other dissenters Thursday.
The justices could decide this spring whether to add the case to their calendar for the term that begins in October.
The case is June Medical Services v. Gee.
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry released the following statement after the Supreme Court's decision:
“In 2014, our duly elected legislators almost unanimously passed Act 620 to require doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court today put enforcement of this pro-woman law on hold for the time being.
We remain hopeful that if the Supreme Court grants certiorari in this case, it will be to re-affirm that courts rule on fact-specific cases; because the facts in our case show Act 620 is constitutional and consistent with our overall regulatory scheme for surgical procedures.
Going forward, my office and I will be carefully reviewing the next steps in our defense of Louisiana's admitting privileges law. We will not waver in defense of our State's pro-woman and pro-life laws; and we will continue to do all that we legally can to protect Louisiana women and the unborn.”
Executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana Alanah Odoms Hebert released the following statement:
“This law would push abortion care out of reach for many women across Louisiana, so we’re relieved the Supreme Court has blocked it from taking effect. Identical to a law struck down by the Court in 2016, these blatantly unconstitutional restrictions are designed to shut down clinics and push abortion care out of reach. Louisiana women are counting on the Court to follow its own precedent and strike down this law for good.”