Skip to content Skip to search

Republish This Story

* Please read before republishing *

We’re happy to make this story available to republish for free under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Creative Commons license as long as you follow our republishing guidelines, which require that you credit The 19th and retain our pixel. See our full guidelines for more information.

To republish, simply copy the HTML at right, which includes our tracking pixel, all paragraph styles and hyperlinks, the author byline and credit to The 19th. Have questions? Please email [email protected].

— The Editors

Loading...

Modal Gallery

/
Sign up for our newsletter

Menu

  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Search
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships
    • From the Collection

      Changing Child Care

      Illustration of a woman feeding a baby a bottle
      • 1 in 4 parents report being fired for work interruptions due to child care breakdowns

        Chabeli Carrazana · February 2
      • Washington, D.C., offers financial relief to local child care workers

        Orion Rummler · September 20
      • As climate change worsens hurricane season in Louisiana, doulas are ensuring parents can safely feed their babies

        Jessica Kutz · May 5
    • From the Collection

      Next-Gen GOP

      Illustration of a woman riding an elephant
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • A banner year for Republican women

        Amanda Becker · November 11
      • Republican women could double representation in the U.S. House

        Amanda Becker · November 4
    • From the Collection

      On The Rise

      Illustration of three women marching
      • Can Cheri Beasley build a winning coalition in North Carolina?

        Candice Norwood · October 11
      • Los Angeles has never elected a woman mayor. Karen Bass hopes to change that.

        Nadra Nittle · September 8
      • Judge J. Michelle Childs is confirmed to D.C. appeals court

        Candice Norwood · July 20
    • From the Collection

      Pandemic Within a Pandemic

      Illustration of four people marching for Black Lives Matter with coronavirus as the backdrop
      • Some LGBTQ+ people worry that the COVID-19 vaccine will affect HIV medication. It won’t.

        Orion Rummler · November 23
      • Why are more men dying from COVID? It’s a complicated story of nature vs. nurture, researchers say

        Mariel Padilla · September 22
      • Few incarcerated women were released during COVID. The ones who remain have struggled.

        Candice Norwood · August 17
    • From the Collection

      Portraits of a Pandemic

      Illustration of a woman wearing a mask and holding up the coronavirus
      • For family caregivers, COVID is a mental health crisis in the making

        Shefali Luthra · October 8
      • A new database tracks COVID-19’s effects on sex and gender

        Shefali Luthra · September 15
      • Pregnant in a pandemic: The 'perfect storm for a crisis'

        Shefali Luthra · August 25
    • From the Collection

      The 19th Explains

      People walking from many articles to one article where they can get the context they need on an issue.
      • The 19th Explains: What we know about Brittney Griner’s case and what it took to get her home

        Candice Norwood, Katherine Gilyard · December 8
      • The 19th Explains: Why the Respect for Marriage Act doesn’t codify same-sex marriage rights

        Kate Sosin · December 8
      • The 19th Explains: Why baby formula is still hard to find months after the shortage

        Mariel Padilla · December 1
    • From the Collection

      The Electability Myth

      Illustration of three women speaking at podiums
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • Stepping in after tragedy: How political wives became widow lawmakers

        Mariel Padilla · May 24
      • Do term limits help women candidates? New York could be a new testing ground

        Barbara Rodriguez · January 11
    • From the Collection

      The Impact of Aging

      A number of older people walking down a path of information.
      • From ballroom dancing to bloodshed, the older AAPI community grapples with gun control

        Nadra Nittle, Mariel Padilla · January 27
      • 'I'm planning on working until the day I die': Older women voters are worried about the future

        Mariel Padilla · June 3
      • Climate change is forcing care workers to act as first responders

        Jessica Kutz · May 31
    • From the Collection

      Voting Rights

      A series of hands reaching for ballots.
      • Election workers believe in our system — and want everyone else to, too

        Barbara Rodriguez, Jennifer Gerson · November 8
      • Voter ID laws stand between transgender people, women and the ballot box

        Barbara Rodriguez · October 14
      • Emily’s List expands focus on diverse candidates and voting rights ahead of midterm elections

        Errin Haines · August 30

    View all collections

  • Explore by Topic

    • 19th Polling
    • Abortion
    • Business & Economy
    • Caregiving
    • Coronavirus
    • Education
    • Election 2020
    • Election 2022
    • Environment & Climate
    • Health
    • Immigration
    • Inside The 19th
    • Justice
    • LGBTQ+
    • Politics
    • Press Release
    • Race
    • Sports
    • Technology

    View All Topics

Home
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Search
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships

We’re an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy. Read our story.

The 19th News(letter)

News from reporters who represent you and your communities.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting...

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Become a member

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

Abortion activists and anti-abortion demonstrators rally in front of the Supreme Court.
Demonstrators rally as the Supreme Court hears arguments in a challenge to the controversial Texas abortion law which bans abortions after 6 weeks. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Abortion

The Supreme Court appears likely to allow challenges to Texas’ six-week abortion law. Here’s what that means.

Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett both seem open to arguments from Texas abortion providers. 

By

Shefali Luthra, Candice Norwood

Published

2021-11-01 14:37
2:37
November 1, 2021
pm

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

The Supreme Court appears poised to allow a lawsuit brought by abortion providers against Texas’ six-week abortion ban to continue, which could restore access for millions of people and discourage other states from pursuing similar legislation.

“It seems to me at least that there is some appetite for getting things back to a status quo in Texas,” said Melissa Murray, a reproductive law expert at New York University. “To restore things to where they were on August 31 as opposed to September 1, and then to allow this challenge to SB 8 to proceed.”

Texas’ six-week ban, known as Senate Bill 8, is largely understood to violate precedent set by Roe v. Wade, which guarantees the right to an abortion up until a fetus can live independently outside the womb. But the word “abortion” was rarely uttered in Monday’s oral arguments, which encompassed two separate cases. 

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

The first, Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, pits major Texas abortion providers against the state’s judicial system, which encompasses clerks, judges and other state officials. Those entities would be tasked with adjudicating civil lawsuits brought under the Texas law, which allows private citizens to sue anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion after six weeks, and promises a successful litigant an award of at least $10,000. 

In that case, the Supreme Court answered a narrow question: When private citizens are the ones suing, can such laws be challenged in federal court? 

The second case, United States of America v. Texas, looks at a different question: whether the United States has the right to challenge the Texas law and whether this particular six-week ban threatens the sovereignty of the U.S. government by creating an avenue for states to circumvent federal law.

Stories by experienced reporters you can trust and relate to.

Delivered directly to your inbox every weekday.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting…

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

A decision on how to proceed with either case could come within days. 

The significance of SB 8’s unusual structure and what that might mean for constitutional rights more broadly was a key focus. It is a point newly confirmed Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar honed in on during the second argument of the day.

“If the state can just take this simple mechanism of taking its enforcement authority and giving it to the general public, backed up with a bounty of $10,000 or $1 million, if they can do that, then no constitutional right is safe,” Prelogar argued. “No constitutional decision from this court is safe. That would be an intolerable state of affairs and it cannot be the law. Our constitutional guarantees cannot be that fragile, and the supremacy of federal law cannot be that easily subject to manipulation.”

Three of the court’s conservative justices — Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett — indicated openness to the arguments made by Texas’ abortion providers, noting in particular that the law turns state officials into enforcement agents. Both Barrett and Kavanaugh previously voted the opposite way, joining the court’s conservative wing in a September 2 decision allowing SB 8 to take effect.

Barrett asked leading questions about the clinics’ inability to obtain constitutional relief in state court under SB 8, which reveals she might vote in the providers’ favor, said Joanna Grossman, a professor at Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law.

Kavanaugh had already been deemed a likely swing vote. Kavanaugh showed particular skepticism of Texas’ argument and questioned whether the law could be used as a blueprint for other issues beyond abortion, such as restricting gun rights. 

Those questions spoke to a deeper issue: Allowing the Texas law to stay in effect could weaken not only the federal government, but the Supreme Court’s overarching authority, by giving states a blueprint for writing laws that violate court precedent but circumvent judicial review.

That appears to be a powerful motivator, suggested Leah Litman, a constitutional law expert at the University of Michigan.

“The court is likely to protect its institutional authority, and that desire will probably unify and unite Democratic appointees and Republican appointees,” she said.

Focusing on the Whole Woman’s Health lawsuit could also allow the court to avoid some of the thornier constitutional questions raised in the U.S. government’s case, she added.

“The U.S. v Texas lawsuit might be — by asking what is the injury to the U.S. — that may be seen as teeing up bigger questions they don’t want to address,” Murray said. “There may be more appetite for the provider suit.”

If the Supreme Court allows the Whole Woman’s Health challenge to proceed, the court could either block the law itself, or send the case back to a lower federal court, the District Court for the Western District of Texas. That court has already once moved to issue an injunction halting enforcement of SB 8 — a decision that was issued by Judge Robert Pitman and then promptly blocked by a federal appeals court. 

“It’s pretty clear the injunction will come back,” Litman said. “The district court, having already issued an injunction, is equipped to act fairly quickly.” 

Grossman agrees. She believes there’s “no question” the justices are going to block SB 8 in some form, though the specifics of what that might look like are harder to predict. Such a decision could have widespread impact. SB 8 has halted access to most abortions in Texas. Hundreds have traveled out of state for care, overwhelming abortion providers in neighboring states. Most minors are unable to seek abortions. 

But any halt to the law could be temporary. The Supreme Court is slated to hear another abortion rights case in exactly one month, addressing the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that would ban abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. In that case, the justices are being asked to directly address the central holding of Roe v. Wade. A ruling upholding the Mississippi law would necessarily weaken the Roe protection, and could eliminate it entirely. 

“Allowing the law to be enjoined only buys you some time,” Murray said. 

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

Help sustain what we started

Your monthly investment is critical to our sustainability as a nonprofit newsroom.

Donate Today

Become a member

Up Next

An abortion rights activist speaks outside the Supreme Court.

Abortion

The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Texas’ abortion law. Here’s what you need to know.

The unusual structure of Senate Bill 8 means that Monday’s arguments will not actually address the constitutional right to an abortion.

Read the Story

The 19th
The 19th is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Our stories are free to republish in accordance with these guidelines.

  • Donate
  • Newsletter
  • Events
  • Search
  • Jobs
  • Fellowships
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Community Guidelines
  • Membership
  • Membership FAQ
  • Major Gifts
  • Sponsorship
  • Privacy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram