This Supreme Court On Friday, Texas’ ban on most abortions remained in effect, providing a glimmer of hope for clinics in the state to challenge the strictest abortion laws in the United States.

A week after the court stated that it would cancel abortion rights and possibly overturn its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling, the decision was disappointed by supporters of abortion rights, but praised by opponents.

Five conservative judges, including three appointed by former President Donald Trump, formed a majority to limit who the clinic can sue. Both parties said that this result may prevent a federal court from effectively obstructing the law.

The court ruled that Texas licensing officials may be prosecuted, but it will not sue state court judges, court clerk, or state attorney general Ken Paxton (Ken Paxton).According to the unusual structure of Texas law, this seems to allow people to freely sue abortion clinics and anyone who “helps or abets” an abortion after heart activity is detected in the embryo, about six weeks or so, in some women Know they were pregnant before

The Center for Reproductive Rights, which represents the Texas Clinic, said on Twitter: “The Supreme Court basically gave the green light to Texas’ cynical plan and prevented the federal courts from blocking unconstitutional laws.”

The court does not stop One month after listening to the debate about the law, Rape or incest is no exception.

Since September 1, the law has been implemented for approximately three months. The Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling legalized abortion nationwide and has been in effect since 1973.

Judge Neil Gorsuch, who has always voted against abortion rights, did not mention Luo in the main opinion of the court on Friday. Gorsuch was one of Trump’s appointments, along with judges Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Connie Barrett.

Abortion providers will now try to run the same laws that frustrated them before. The federal judge who blocked the law, SB 8, will almost certainly be asked to do so again. His decision will then be reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which has twice voted to allow the enforcement of the abortion ban.

In any case, all of this can be returned to the hands of the judge. So far, the nine-person court has not had five votes in favor of shelving the law while the legal battle is in progress.

“The court should end this madness a few months ago, before SB 8 came into effect for the first time. It did not do so at that time and it failed again today,” Judge Sonia Sotomayor said in a separate opinion on Friday. Write.

In the Mississippi case that was debated last week, the conservative majority of the court also seems likely to cancel abortion rights, although the decision will not be made until the spring.

If Roe is rejected, then the fight around Texas law will largely be irrelevant, because Texas is one of 12 states and its trigger law will prohibit abortion in the post-Roe world.

Friday’s High Court ruling was made on the second day of a state court judge in Texas Ruling that the enforcement of the lawsuit against violators by awarding a judgment of $10,000 is unconstitutional But left the law.

The legal battle over Texas law focuses on its unusual structure and whether it improperly limits the ways in which the law can be challenged in court. Texas lawmakers delegated the responsibility for law enforcement to ordinary citizens, not state officials.

The law authorizes litigation against clinics, doctors, and others who implement or assist in the prohibition of abortion. The case raises a series of complex questions about who can sue the law in federal court, which is a typical way to challenge abortion restrictions. In fact, federal courts often shelve similar laws, which rely on traditional enforcement by state and local authorities.

The Supreme Court voted 8 to 1 on Friday in favor of allowing the clinic’s lawsuit against the injunction to proceed. Only Justice Clarence Thomas opposed. But the court had a clear divergence with a score of 5-4 on a thorny issue, namely, aiming at a court order that ostensibly tried to block the law. The judge ruled that Texas licensed officials might be prosecuted, but rejected the charges against state court judges, court clerk, and state attorney general.

Not a modern healthcare subscriber? Register today.

Gorsuch wrote that abortion providers must abide by the same rules that apply to those who claim other constitutional rights. “Regardless of whether the law in question is deemed to obstruct freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the right to bear arms or any other rights, the courts always apply these requirements. Petitioners are not entitled to special immunity,” Gorsuch wrote.

Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberal justices stated in an opinion that the purpose of Texas law is to “invalidate this court’s decision on abortion.”

The same four judges dissented in September when the court refused to block the law.

“The nature of the federal rights violated does not matter; the role of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system is threatened,” Roberts wrote.

Roberts called on US District Judge Robert Pitman to “immediately take appropriate relief measures” after his injunction was overturned by the Court of Appeals.

Sotomayor also condemned her colleagues for “disastrous consequences for women seeking to exercise their constitutional abortion rights in Texas.” She said that the court’s decision closed the most direct way to challenge the law and would “clear the way” for other states to “re-enact and improve Texas” plans in the future to exercise any rights recognized by this court. No. agree.”

Since the law came into effect in September This is the strictest abortion restriction in the country since the Supreme Court first declared that women have the right to abortion in its Roe v. Wade judgment in 1973.

In the first month of Texas law, a study published by University of Texas researchers found that compared with September 2020, the number of abortions across the state fell by 50%. The study was based on data from 19 of the 24 abortion clinics in the state, and evaluated the program in accordance with Texas policy.

According to another study by the Guttmacher Institute, some residents who left the state to seek abortion had to travel outside the neighboring state, where clinics could not keep up with the increase in patients in Texas.

After the court voted in September, the Justice Department filed its own lawsuit against Texas law. The judge on Friday dismissed the lawsuit, which raised a series of difficult legal issues.