Friday, October 22, 2021

U.S. v. Texas - Sotomayor dissenting

21a85-21-588.pdf

Sonia Sotomayor, dissenting:
Recognizing that Texas’ scheme raises concerns of imperative public importance, the Court properly grants certiorari before judgment. See this Court’s Rule 11. However, the Court’s failure to issue an administrative stay of the Fifth Circuit’s order pending its decision on this application will have profound and immediate consequences.
By delaying any remedy, the Court enables continued and irreparable harm to women seeking abortion care and providers of such care in Texas—exactly as S. B. 8’s architects intended, see infra, at 6–7. Whatever equities favor caution in staying a state law under normal circumstances cannot outweigh the total and intentional denial of a constitutional right to women while this Court considers the serious questions presented.
The District Court concluded that S. B. 8 “‘has had an immediate and devastating effect on abortion care in Texas.’” 2021 WL 4593319, *36. That is because the Act’s chilling effects “operate . . . as an effective deterrent to provision of pre-viability abortion services in Texas, precluding the vast majority of individuals from accessing this constitutional right” and causing a “dismantling of the provider network” across the State. Id., at *38. Before the District Court, Texas identified only one abortion that had occurred in the State beyond S. B. 8’s unlawful 6-week restriction 

No comments:

Post a Comment