SCOTUS decision on LA abortion law!

[redheadbaker]

abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-hands-major-decision-louisiana-abortion-case/story?id=71254751

The Supreme Court announced a major ruling on abortion, deciding that the Louisiana law should not stand.

The opinion was written by Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts also filed an opinion concurring for the majority.

The case, June Medical Services v. Russo, was a challenge to a Louisiana law that required abortion providers have admitting privileges with a nearby hospital -- an agreement between a doctor and a hospital that allows a patient to go that hospital if they need urgent care.

[StrawberryBlondie]

I was just coming in to post this. Yay!!!!

[kadams767]

I am truly amazed this morning, and thankful.

[seeyalater52]

When I saw Breyer I was straight up like WTF is happening!? This is the damn best.

Holy shit. Yay.

[Velar Fricative]

YESSSSSSSS

Looks like Roberts voted with the majority but didn't adopt their reasoning. Instead, respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

[pixy0stix]

Hot damn!

[sugarbear]

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:56 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

YESSSSSSSS

Looks like Roberts voted with the majority but didn't adopt their reasoning. Instead, respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

Can someone who knows more than me about the law (won’t take much to exceed my L&O SVU degree) tell me more about this? Is it common?

[nsl]

Oh wow! This is huge!

[imimahoney]

OMG, YES!!!!

[cville]

I am legit crying. I'm so happy.

[imimahoney]

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:56 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

YESSSSSSSS

Looks like Roberts voted with the majority but didn't adopt their reasoning. Instead, respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

That's what I was hoping would happen (realistically). Wow, amazing news.

[picksthemusic]

Tears of joy here. Thank goodness.

[cville]

Jun 29, 2020 9:29:43 GMT -5 sugarbear said:

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:56 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

YESSSSSSSS

Looks like Roberts voted with the majority but didn't adopt their reasoning. Instead, respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

Can someone who knows more than me about the law (won’t take much to exceed my L&O SVU degree) tell me more about this? Is it common?

Yes. Lawyers be lawyering.


ETA: to agree with a conclusion but not the legal rationale is not uncommon. Here the answer is binary, legal or not legal. The 4 writing the majority opinion say "not legal because the it's an impermissible infringement on constitional rights (undue burden)." Roberts is saying "I agree other cases have said that and therefore am constrained from saying otherwise here", but specifically NOT agreeing that he thinks this law is an undue burden. Which, with this court is a massive victory hence my tears of joy.

[NewOrleans]

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:33 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

When I saw Breyer I was straight up like WTF is happening!? This is the damn best.

Holy shit. Yay.

What about seeing Breyer surprised you?  

[isabel]

Holy shit!!!! I almost can’t believe it.

[wanderingback]

Yay!
I was in the middle of a task and hadn't checked my phone...
Then saw I had over 50 messages from a few groups I was in, so nervous checking them lol.
We were all prepared for the worse.
The fight isn't over, but this is so wonderful!

[imimahoney]

Jun 29, 2020 9:29:43 GMT -5 sugarbear said:

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:56 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

YESSSSSSSS

Looks like Roberts voted with the majority but didn't adopt their reasoning. Instead, respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

Can someone who knows more than me about the law (won’t take much to exceed my L&O SVU degree) tell me more about this? Is it common?

Common... I don't know but he's done it before. I asked last week and the replies gave a few examples of when he's sided with precedent.

[NewOrleans]

Jun 29, 2020 9:29:43 GMT -5 sugarbear said:

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:56 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

YESSSSSSSS

Looks like Roberts voted with the majority but didn't adopt their reasoning. Instead, respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority.

Can someone who knows more than me about the law (won’t take much to exceed my L&O SVU degree) tell me more about this? Is it common?

Not a lawyer, but yes, I do think it’s common enough. 

[msmerymac]

My heart almost stopped. OMG!

[seeyalater52]

Jun 29, 2020 9:44:59 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:33 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

When I saw Breyer I was straight up like WTF is happening!? This is the damn best.

Holy shit. Yay.

What about seeing Breyer surprised you?  

Because I saw that he was the author before I saw what the decision was and as soon as I saw his name I knew we had won, which I was truly not expecting.

[pugz]

I just...Supreme Court June is always such a freaking roller coaster! Wow!!!

[NewOrleans]

Jun 29, 2020 9:52:56 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

Jun 29, 2020 9:44:59 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

What about seeing Breyer surprised you?  

Because I saw that he was the author before I saw what the decision was and as soon as I saw his name I knew we had won, which I was truly not expecting.

Gotcha.  I thought you meant something specific to him that surprised you.  😝

[seeyalater52]

Jun 29, 2020 9:57:20 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

Jun 29, 2020 9:52:56 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

Because I saw that he was the author before I saw what the decision was and as soon as I saw his name I knew we had won, which I was truly not expecting.

Gotcha.  I thought you meant something specific to him that surprised you.  😝

Hah, nope! He’s a gem. Poor guy also might want to retire soon. Fucking Trump.

[msmerymac]

Jun 29, 2020 9:24:33 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

When I saw Breyer I was straight up like WTF is happening!? This is the damn best.

Holy shit. Yay.

Same. I was scanning it like, "Wait. This is good? Is this good? Can it be that this is good?" and when I saw Breyer wrote the opinion all my fears went away. 

[cattledogkisses]

Oh, I’m so relieved!

[biscoffcookies]

Hey guys, remember when Collins said it was totes fine she voted.to confirm Kavanaugh because he'd follow precedent when it came to abortion?

Time for (another) spite donation to Gideon.

[carmenere]

Jun 29, 2020 11:55:40 GMT -5 biscoffcookies said:

Hey guys, remember when Collins said it was totes fine she voted.to confirm Kavanaugh because he'd follow precedent when it came to abortion?

Time for (another) spite donation to Gideon.

"It'll be fine," they said. "He said 'it's settled law'," they said...

[wanderingback]

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't completely understand, but my contacts are saying to hold off on 100% celebrating the standing decision. That the 3rd party standing decision isn't straight forward. So there might be a caveat for us suing on behalf of our patients, but not completely taken away. Which would be ugh.

[cville]

Jun 29, 2020 12:19:01 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't completely understand, but my contacts are saying to hold off on 100% celebrating the standing decision. That the 3rd party standing decision isn't straight forward. So there might be a caveat for us suing on behalf of our patients, but not completely taken away. Which would be ugh.

The fight is for sure not over. But this is still so much better than I feared.

[cville]

Also, just because I will never forget, fuck Gorsuch in his stolen seat, fuck Kavanhaugh and his "Roe is settled precedent" lie, and fuck Susan Collins and let's vote her out.