releases: https://www.coons.senate.gov/news/press-releases/sens-carper-coons-stand-up-for-constitutionally-protected-reproductive-rights-file-amicus-brief-in-critical-supreme-court-case
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://www.coons.senate.gov/news/press-releases/sens-carper-coons-stand-up-for-constitutionally-protected-reproductive-rights-file-amicus-brief-in-critical-supreme-court-case | Sens. Carper, Coons Stand Up for Constitutionally Protected Reproductive Rights; File Amicus Brief in Critical Supreme Court Case | 2019-12-03 | 2019 | 2019-12 | Democrat | House | DE | Christopher Coons | C001088 | www.coons.senate.gov | legacy | WASHINGTON, D.C.Today, U.S. Senators Tom Carper and Chris Coons (both D-Del.), along with 34 other Senators and 161 members of the U.S. House of Representatives,filed an amicus briefin the case ofJune Medical Services LLC v. Gee, which is currently pending before the Supreme Court of the United States and represents a direct challengeto the Supreme Court's landmark ruling inRoe v. Wade. June Medical Services LLC v. Geeaddresses the impact of Louisiana's Act 620, an extremeanti-abortionlaw that forces abortion providers to obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic. The law provides no medical benefit and would harm patients by stifling access to abortion care. If the law goes into effect, only one clinic and one abortion provider would remain in Louisiana a state with over 360,000 women of reproductive age. Act 620, disguised as an effort to promote women's health, provides no medical benefit and instead will only create significant obstacles for women seeking abortions,the lawmakers wrote in the brief. Lawmakers emphasized in the brief that, just three years ago inWhole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, the Court struck down a materially identical Texas law because it imposed significant burdens on abortion access without providing health or safety benefits. Since then, the facts, the law, and the Constitution have remained the same. Lawmakers urged the court to uphold its precedent inRoe, Planned Parenthood v. Casey,andWhole Woman's Healthand strike down Act 620. There is no compelling reason here to upend this settled precedent, and no change of circumstances betweenWhole Woman's Healthand this action that justifies a different outcome Laws like Act 620, enacted in defiance of this Court's constitutional pronouncements, undermine our nation's confidence in the legislative process and the rule of law,wrote the lawmakers in the brief. Read the amicus briefhere. ### | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |