Show of hands. Anybody surprised at this? Anybody?
Bueller? Bueller?
this is the problem when using bogus ass sources like slate for your information 10/10 times they get it wrong.
here is his actual opinion on the matter.
Louisiana has three clinics that currently provide abortions. As relevant here, four doctors perform abortions at
those three clinics. One of those four doctors has admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, as required by
the new law. The question is whether the other three
doctors—Doe 2, Doe 5, and Doe 6—can obtain the necessary admitting privileges. If they can, then the three
clinics could continue providing abortions. And if so, then
the new law would not impose an undue burden for purposes of Whole Woman’s Health. By contrast, if the three
doctors cannot obtain admitting privileges, then one or
two of the three clinics would not be able to continue
providing abortions. If so, then even the State acknowledges that the new law might be deemed to impose an
undue burden for purposes of Whole Woman’s Health.
The law has not yet taken effect, so the case comes to us
in the context of a pre-enforcement facial challenge.
That means that the parties have offered, in essence, competing
predictions about whether those three doctors can obtain
admitting privileges. The District Court concluded that
the three doctors likely could not obtain admitting privileges. The District Court therefore enjoined the law. The
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit concluded that the
three doctors likely could obtain admitting privileges. The
Fifth Circuit therefore lifted the injunction.
See what happens when you use facts instead of nonsensical appeals to emotion.
things make way more sense.
He was right the stay should have been rejected until such time as the plaintiffs can produce
an actual undo burden exists.
