Despite delaying its decision in a hearing Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court’s final decision on Texas’ law defending admitting privileges could impact Wisconsin’s abortion laws.
Texas’ case defends several abortion regulations, one of which requires abortion providers to obtain admitting privileges. Wisconsin had a similar law in 2013, which ensured abortion providers obtained admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of where they performed abortions. U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals removed this law in 2015.
Federal appeals court declares Wisconsin abortion law unconstitutional
Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel filed a brief in support of Texas defending admitting privileges in January and looks to have the law restored in Wisconsin as well. Wisconsin Right to Life Executive Director Heather Weininger, proponent of the brief, said in a statement the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Texas’ law would put Wisconsin’s law at stake as well. She said it would impact the health and safety of women seeking abortion in Wisconsin.
“This case is incredibly important, not only for the health and safety of women when it comes to the current sub-par standards of abortion facilities, but also for how any abortion law is measured by the courts,” Weininger said.
Attorney general files brief in support of abortion admitting privileges
Before U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away in February, the court had nine sitting members, but is now down to eight. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin said in a statement if the decision was split 4-4 between the judges there would be no conclusive verdict. This would imply that the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling to remove Wisconsin’s law would still be valid and not change until a final verdict is released.
Texas’ law is in place because the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it be retained in 2015. If the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision is inconclusive, Texas’ law will still be valid based on this ruling, Planned Parenthood said in the statement.
Tanya Atkinson, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin executive director, said in the statement the Texas law was “extremely restrictive” and “unnecessary.” She said it would reduce women’s access to safe and legal abortion care in Texas and could lead to other states implementing similar laws.
“Doctors know that dangerous laws like admitting privileges put women’s health at risk and threaten to block access to needed safe and legal medical services,” Atkinson said. “Abortion is a deeply personal decision that should be made by a woman and her doctor — without intrusion from politicians.”
Atkinson said this case highlighted the importance of electing leaders who trust women to make their own health care decisions.
Jenny Higgins, University of Wisconsin associate professor of gender and women’s studies, said there is no medical evidence that suggests abortion will put women’s health and safety at risk. She said regardless of what the court decides, evidence shows restricting access to abortion services will harm women and increase cases of unintended pregnancy.
“Whatever the court decides I think the evidence still stands that restrictions to accessing contraceptive and abortion care are not good for women or their reproductive health or mental health,” Higgins said.
According to USA Today, members of the court implied in the hearing Wednesday the case could be sent to lower courts for further analysis before being reviewed by its members again.
