Read the week's best commentary from bloggers at RH Reality Check, Feministing and more.
ABORTION-RIGHTS MOVEMENT:
"Is one-sixth a 'large fraction' when it comes to our constitutional rights?" David Cohen/Jeffrey Bingenheimer, RH Reality Check: Cohen and Bingenheimer discuss a recent study that they conducted to determine whether one-sixth is a "large fraction" as defined by the Supreme Court's Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision. According to the authors, the Supreme Court in Casey said "that an abortion restriction will be found unconstitutional if it constitutes an 'undue burden' on a woman's right to choose," noting that "an undue burden exists when the law is a substantial obstacle for a 'large fraction' of people who are subject to that restriction." The authors explain that they chose one-sixth as their unit of measurement because it represents the fraction of Texas women who "would face a serious obstacle in obtaining an abortion" under the state's omnibus antiabortion-rights law (HB 2), which is being challenged in the Supreme Court this week. In their study, the authors asked respondents whether "one-sixth" constituted a large fraction in several different scenarios, such as one-sixth of someone's personal savings or one-sixth of the pills in a bottle of Tylenol being poisoned. The authors found that participations' perception of "whether one-sixth is a large fraction depends heavily upon the baseline expectation in the scenario in which it is presented." Cohen and Bingenheimer write that the Supreme Court "has never specified what exactly a 'large fraction' is under the Casey test, so the everyday English understanding of the phrase matters." The high court "needs to take this study's findings into consideration," the authors write, concluding, "In particular, if the justices value a woman's constitutional right to choose to have an abortion, then one-sixth should be seen as a large fraction -- because our baseline expectation should be that few people have their constitutional rights denied" (Cohen/Bingenheimer, RH Reality Check, 2/29).
What others are saying about the abortion-rights movement:
~ "The Supreme Court decision that made a mess of abortion rights," Nina Martin, Mother Jones.
~ "4 facts that prove just how endangered abortion rights are," Suzannah Weiss, Bustle.
~ "Artist Chi Nguyen creating a giant quilt to represent all the women affected by Texas anti-choice bill," Emma Cueto, Bustle.
~ "What's at stake in the Texas abortion case? A fundamental right and truth in judging," Dorothy Samuels, Huffington Post blogs.
~ "Will the U.S. Supreme Court take precedent seriously on abortion?" Garrett Epps, The Atlantic.
ABORTION RESTRICTIONS:
"Court ruling forces all but one of Louisiana's abortion clinics to close," Maya Dusenbery, Feministing: "As if to underscore just how high the stakes are" in the Supreme Court case challenging Texas' omnibus antiabortion-rights law (HB 2), "an appeals court ruled that Louisiana's own Texas-style [targeted regulation of abortion providers] ... is allowed to be enforced" while litigation challenging the requirement continues, Dusenbery writes. She notes, "Unless SCOTUS steps in, three out of four of [Louisiana's] abortion clinics must close." She adds, "With only one clinic left standing in Louisiana, the nearest abortion provider for many people in the state is the sole clinic in Mississippi, which is only open right now because enforcement of their Texas-style TRAP law has been blocked by the court until SCOTUS gives the final verdict on whether these kinds of laws pose an 'undue burden' on the right to choose." Further, "If that clinic were shut down, the nearest provider for many Louisiana and Mississippi women would be the five clinics in Alabama -- except that four of them would be shut-down if their Texas-style TRAP law currently blocked went into effect," she explains. Noting that a 4-4 tie in the Supreme Court's ruling on HB 2 "would mean abortion is inaccessible in a huge part of the South," and a loss would allow other states to enact similar restrictions, Dusenbery concludes, "this is what we'd call a must-win situation" (Dusenbery, Feministing, 2/26).
What others are saying about abortion restrictions:
~ "Texas's sham abortion laws," Eric Segall, American Constitution Society for Law and Policy's "ACS blog."
~ "How HB 2 left Candice 'choice/less' [Audio]," Jenn Stanley, RH Reality Check.
~ "6 in 10 women now subjected to abortion waiting period laws," Samantha Allen, Daily Beast.
