SCOTUS hears a new case, potential to overturn Roe v. Wade

Autumn Page, Staff Reporter

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Once again, the Supreme Court is considering overturning the historic ruling of Roe v. Wade, aka allowing women to have abortions without the government throwing a fit. 

What brought this infamous case up again is June Medical Services v. Gee. According to an article by Reproductiverights.org, the June Medical Services v. Gee involves Act 620, passed in Louisiana, requires every physician who performs or induces abortions need to have “active admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles from where the abortion took place. “Active admitting privileges” means the doctor has the right to admit patients, through membership with the hospital, to a specific hospital or medical center. 

June Medical Services v. Gee essentially causes the closure of abortion clinics and limits access to abortion. There are oral hearings for this case beginning in March 2020. 

There was an identical case to this one, Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which the Supreme Court ruled as unconstitutional. There’s an old saying that history always repeats itself, well, here you go. 

It’s literally being called an “identical case,” and why the Supreme Court decided to hear this case is beyond me. 

Louisiana is defying the decision made by the Supreme Court in Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt with June Medical Services v. Gee. Can’t us women get a break, we’re literally just trying to thrive. It really do be like that sometimes. 

Present day, there are over 200 members of Congress that have asked the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade in a brief called amicus curiae, or “friend of the court” brief. Excuse me while I gag. 

If you thought that was all — unfortunately but probably not surprisingly — you’re wrong. Not only Roe v. Wade, they have also asked for Planned Parenthood v. Casey to be overturned too

Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruled that women have the right to obtain an abortion prior to fetal viability. It rejected Roe v. Wade’s trimester-based framework for allowing states to increase availability of abortion in favor of a more flexible medical definition of viability, according to Britannica.com. 

OK, but seriously guys, calm down. We’re just getting into 2020, and all of this is already happening. First WWIII, and now this. 

According to Buzzfeed News, in the brief, the members argue that the right to an abortion is “unworkable.” It was signed by 39 Republican senators and 168 members of the House of Representatives — two of which were Democrats. EXCUSE ME.

Within June Medical Services v. Gee, Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt and Roe v. Wade, there are some words being thrown around. “Undue burden,” “right for abortion” obviously, “health-related benefit” and “relevant credentialing function.” Now, you may be wondering what any of that means or why boomers are throwing around some big words. 

In Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the court found that it added an “undue burden” onto women and it brought no “health-related benefit” and “relevant credentialing function.” 

So how we go from the ruling of Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt to Roe v. Wade possibly being overturned is beyond me. What is so bad about getting an abortion? Why does what someone does with their body such a concern for someone else? 

If you care that much about what someone else does with their body, then maybe you need to pick up a hobby, like reading per se, or a significant other.