Experts Available: June Medical Services v. Russo

Digital Communications Associate

On March 4th, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in June Medical Services v. Russo (formerly June Medical Services v. Gee), a challenge to a Louisiana law requiring that abortion providers have admitting privileges at a local hospital in order to practice. If the law goes into effect, two of the state’s three remaining abortion clinics could be shut down.

Given the potentially far-reaching impact of June Medical Services v. Russo, which could have implications for abortion access not only in Louisiana but nationwide as Roe v. Wade is further dismantled, we have compiled a list of scholars who are available to comment on the case and what it could mean for the future of reproductive rights in the United States.

June v. Russo

University of California-San Francisco

"In 2016, Whole Women’s Health vs. Hellerstadt was decided and established a precedent of removing undue burdens to people most impacted by abortion restrictions. Now, with a new court, stare decisus or court precedent should determine that June Medical Group vs. Gee (Russo) be struck down, particularly since it is so similar to the Whole Women’s Health case in Texas. However, with the change of the court, it isn’t clear precedent will matter. It is unfortunate that the people we serve in Louisiana are being used as a political pawn instead of being able to rely on receiving healthcare they seek and need. I am hopeful that the justices will understand the need to listen to and trust the people seeking and providing abortion care. The public knows what they need and we should trust them to make these decisions."


 

Tulane University
1.jpg

"A decision to uphold the Louisiana admitting privileges law in the June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo case would not only be devastating for families in this state, where Louisianans would no longer be able to access crucial healthcare in a state with already dismal reproductive health outcomes. It would also deal a great blow to reproductive rights and health nationwide, setting the precedent for other states to pass laws that disregard medical evidence in favor of a moral agenda with which much of the American public disagrees."

University of California, San Francisco
Joffe

June v. Russo is extremely worrisome for the prochoice movement, not only because the case brazenly ignores the Court’s decision about admitting privileges in the 2016 case, Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt, but also because this newer case can potentially strip abortion providers of the right to litigate on behalf of their patients.”

Mississippi State University
Kelly

"I have studied reproductive politics for 15 years, first focusing upon the crisis pregnancy center movement, an evangelical anti-abortion movement dominated by and led by women. I have also published work on post abortion syndrome as a medically false social diagnosis. I am currently working on a book project focused upon Mississippi abortion politics and activism.

 

These laws are pointless, even counterproductive, in terms of safeguarding women’s health. First, first trimester abortions are incredibly safe, safer than childbirth, even. Second, no reputable hospital is going to refuse treatment in an actual emergency just because a provider doesn’t have admitting privileges. This is about shutting down clinics. Period."

Ohio State University-Main Campus
alison norris

"We have examples from the entire globe: restricting abortion results in more unsafe abortions. Restricting abortions forces people to have unwanted births. Where abortion is available without restrictions, it is safe. Unsafe abortion and forced births increases the rates of maternal mortality."

The University of Texas at Austin

“The Supreme Court should consider the volume of scientific evidence, as it did when it decided Texas’ admitting privileges law was unconstitutional in 2016.

University of Cincinnati-Main Campus
Danielle Bessett Headshot

Expert in issues surrounding reproduction, medical sociology, family, the body, gender, and representations of reproduction in popular culture.

Karissa Haugeberg

Tulane University

Email: [email protected]

 

“The stakes are very high in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo. The Court might draw upon its 2016 decision in Hellerstedt to affirm that Louisiana’s laws pose an undue burden to women seeking abortion and are thus unconstitutional—or it will permit states to chip away at the abortion right through medically unnecessary regulations as they have since 1992, with Planned Parenthood v. Casey.