Principle over politics? Why Chief Justice Roberts upheld abortion rights.
In its sprint to release the last of its opinions this term, the U.S. Supreme Court provided another surprise ruling Monday in striking down a Louisiana abortion regulation.
The regulation in question, Act 620, resembled “almost word-for-word” a Texas law the high court had declared unconstitutional only four years ago. For the court’s four liberal justices, that precedent – along with factual details about the regulation determined by a federal district court in the Pelican state – was enough to rule that Act 620 is also unconstitutional.
“This case is similar to, nearly identical with Whole Woman’s Health,” the 2016 Texas case, wrote Justice Stephen Breyer for that four-justice plurality. “The law must consequently reach a similar conclusion.”
That opinion, however, is not the controlling decision in the case. Instead it is the concurrence written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who dissented from – which holds that courts must honor precedent – compelled him to agree with Justice Breyer’s opinion.
“We won this battle”Opening the way for more restrictionsYou’re reading a preview, subscribe to read more.
Start your free 30 days