SCOTUS Voids Part Of California Law Regulating Crisis Pregnancy Centers

WASHINGTON, DC - June 27:  A podium awaits pro-choice speakers in front of the U.S. Supreme Court  on June 27, 2016 in Washington, DC. A ruling is expected in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, a Texas case the places restrictions on abortion clinics, as well as rulings in the former Virginia Governor's corruption case and a gun rights case. (Photo by Pete Marovich/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 27: A podium awaits pro-choice speakers in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 27, 2016 in Washington, DC. A ruling is expected in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, a Texas case the pla... WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 27: A podium awaits pro-choice speakers in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 27, 2016 in Washington, DC. A ruling is expected in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, a Texas case the places restrictions on abortion clinics, as well as rulings in the former Virginia Governor's corruption case and a gun rights case. (Photo by Pete Marovich/Getty Images) MORE LESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says a California law that forces anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion probably violates the Constitution.

The 5-4 ruling Tuesday also casts doubts on similar laws in Hawaii and Illinois.

The California law took effect in 2016. It requires centers that are licensed by the state to tell clients about the availability of contraception, abortion and pre-natal care, at little or no cost.

Centers that are unlicensed have to post a sign that said so. The court struck down that portion of the law.

The centers said they were singled out and forced to deliver a message with which they disagreed. California said the law was needed to let poor women know all their options.

Justice Clarence Thomas said in his majority opinion said the centers “are likely to succeed” in their constitutional challenge to the law.

Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for four liberal dissenters, said among the reasons the law should be upheld is that the high court has previously upheld state laws requiring doctors to tell women seeking abortions about adoption services. “After all, the law must be evenhanded,” Breyer said.

54
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. But…emails…

    I don’t even have the energy to muster any outrage. I’m so tired of this shit.

  2. Ah, don’t you just love the smell of some Taliban in the morning?!

  3. Good to know that one person has essentially decided the most momentous court cases, affecting everything from Bush v Gore to money in elections to guns in every household to voting rights for the past 18 years. Quite the democracy we live in.

  4. Ready to admit we’re a fascist country yet?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

48 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for sandi Avatar for ajm Avatar for nickdanger Avatar for imkmu3 Avatar for damiana Avatar for arrrrrj Avatar for maxwellsdemon Avatar for steviedee111 Avatar for sniffit Avatar for sparrowhawk Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for cd Avatar for ottnott Avatar for tena Avatar for dommyluc Avatar for docd Avatar for ljb860 Avatar for rickjones Avatar for socalista Avatar for pauldownard Avatar for carolson Avatar for c_stedman

Continue Discussion