Supreme Court strikes restrictive Texas abortion law

The ruling is likely to galvanize anti-abortion votes in the presidential race and highlight the political fight over who will be appointed to the vacant seat on the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court on Monday struck a sweeping anti-abortion law in Texas, granting abortion rights supporters their most significant legal victory in a generation.

Justice Anthony Kennedy sided with the court’s liberals in the 5-3 decision that struck two key provisions in the Texas law, which the court said placed unconstitutional burdens on women seeking abortion. It marks the first time the court has imposed limits on state abortion restrictions in more than 15 years and pushes back against a wave of restrictive state laws enacted in recent years.

“We conclude that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes,” Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the court. “Each constitutes an undue burden on abortion access and each violates the Federal Constitution.”

The ruling is likely to galvanize anti-abortion votes in the presidential race and highlight the political fight over who will be appointed to the vacant seat on the Supreme Court. Anti-abortion groups were hoping to enact laws similar to Texas in other parts of the country. A handful of states had already done so; those laws are now likely to face immediate challenges in the lower courts.

In a pair of tweets Hillary Clinton immediately hailed the ruling. “SCOTUS’s decision is a victory for women in Texas and across America. Safe abortion should be a right—not just on paper, but in reality.”

“This fight isn’t over: The next president has to protect women’s health,” the presumptive Democratic nominee added. “Women won’t be ‘punished’ for exercising their basic rights.” That was directed at Donald Trump, who in March suggested that women be punished for having abortions — if the procedure were outlawed — before reversing himself.

“Today is a huge win for women, but there is more work to be done,” National Abortion Federation president Vicki Saporta said. “While this decision will help with the barriers in Texas and gives a solid precedent to strike down similar laws in other states as unconstitutional, there are still many politically-motivated, medically-unnecessary barriers to accessing abortion care throughout the U.S.”

In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, a group of Texas abortion clinics had challenged the state law that required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and to perform abortions only in ambulatory surgical centers.

More From Politico: