it's june medical

BREYER HAS IT! (PLURALITY)

CHIEF JUSTICE writes concurrence saying stare decisis compels this result (TRUE) https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf

#SCOTUS strikes down the LA admitting privileges law

not to say it, but .... https://twitter.com/LeahLitman/status/1273615672883523584

like i said, i was really looking forward to reading this guy's take on women's health: https://twitter.com/LeahLitman/status/1277405776257191936

u up @SenatorCollins? Both of the nominees you voted for would have upheld the admitting privileges law that #SCOTUS invalidated _four_ years ago.

we will have more analysis @StrictScrutiny_. This is an important win for the women in Louisiana. And Julie Rikelman @ReproRights did a FANTASTIC job at argument.

But it is NOT at all encouraging for the future of abortion rights given the narrowness of the Chief Justice's concurrence: "I am voting this way only because SCOTUS struck down this exact same law 4 years ago."

No one with a straight face could distinguish the two laws.

AND YET the other four conservative Justices would have upheld the LA law.

OK after reading it again, I think the Chief's concurrence is even _worse_ for abortion rights than I thought, given that he purports to adhere to WWH, only to the extent the case was not about the benefits of the law? (i.e., that undue burden is only about effects/burdens???)