1 00:00:00,680 --> 00:00:05,000 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grassoe from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:05,320 --> 00:00:07,920 Speaker 1: The U. S. Supreme Court will hear its first abortion 3 00:00:08,039 --> 00:00:11,680 Speaker 1: case with a new conservative majority this term, ruling on 4 00:00:11,760 --> 00:00:15,680 Speaker 1: a Louisiana law that requires doctors who perform abortions to 5 00:00:15,720 --> 00:00:18,919 Speaker 1: get admitting privileges at a local hospital. The law is 6 00:00:18,960 --> 00:00:21,720 Speaker 1: similar to a Texas measure the Court struck down in 7 00:00:22,280 --> 00:00:25,840 Speaker 1: sixteen when Justice Anthony Kennedy was still on the court. 8 00:00:26,200 --> 00:00:29,200 Speaker 1: The case promises to provide the clearest picture yet of 9 00:00:29,200 --> 00:00:33,960 Speaker 1: whether Chief Justice John Roberts and the reconstituted Court will 10 00:00:34,000 --> 00:00:37,479 Speaker 1: move quickly to roll back abortion rights. Joining me is 11 00:00:37,520 --> 00:00:41,480 Speaker 1: Carol Sanger, a professor at Columbia Law School. So, Carol, 12 00:00:41,520 --> 00:00:45,240 Speaker 1: the case before the Court is not directly about whether 13 00:00:45,280 --> 00:00:48,559 Speaker 1: women have the right to an abortion. It's about admitting 14 00:00:48,600 --> 00:00:52,199 Speaker 1: privileges for doctors. So why is it so important? The 15 00:00:52,240 --> 00:00:57,160 Speaker 1: admitting privileges issue is very important because it's one of 16 00:00:57,280 --> 00:01:01,320 Speaker 1: the techniques that's being used to make abort orcian harder 17 00:01:01,560 --> 00:01:06,200 Speaker 1: to get by increasing the burdens that doctors have to 18 00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:10,040 Speaker 1: follow in order to be licensed physicians who can perform 19 00:01:10,080 --> 00:01:14,200 Speaker 1: abortions under state law. And so what admitting privileges. It 20 00:01:14,319 --> 00:01:18,240 Speaker 1: does is say every doctor who performs abortions or a 21 00:01:18,280 --> 00:01:22,160 Speaker 1: certain number of abortions has to have permission from a 22 00:01:22,280 --> 00:01:25,800 Speaker 1: hospital within thirty miles of the clinic in order to 23 00:01:26,160 --> 00:01:30,160 Speaker 1: be licensed to perform abortions. We have this identical case 24 00:01:30,400 --> 00:01:34,520 Speaker 1: in Texas, and in Texas nothing is thirty miles from 25 00:01:34,560 --> 00:01:38,000 Speaker 1: anything else. That's a bit of an exaggeration, but we 26 00:01:38,080 --> 00:01:41,319 Speaker 1: know that it's very difficult to find hospital that close, 27 00:01:41,959 --> 00:01:45,119 Speaker 1: and so the thought was by the state legislature, this 28 00:01:45,200 --> 00:01:48,200 Speaker 1: is a really good way to cut down on the 29 00:01:48,320 --> 00:01:53,240 Speaker 1: number of people who will be legally permitted to perform abortions. 30 00:01:53,760 --> 00:01:57,880 Speaker 1: It doesn't regulate women, but it does regulate doctors. And 31 00:01:57,920 --> 00:02:01,240 Speaker 1: so there are sort of three category rates that abortion 32 00:02:01,280 --> 00:02:04,960 Speaker 1: regulation takes. One is to regulate women by like making 33 00:02:05,000 --> 00:02:09,440 Speaker 1: them have waiting periods before they can consent, listen to 34 00:02:09,480 --> 00:02:14,480 Speaker 1: mandatory scripts, things like that. The other is to regulate 35 00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:18,399 Speaker 1: facilities by saying the facilities have to have something very 36 00:02:18,440 --> 00:02:22,160 Speaker 1: close to a hospital operating room. And the third is 37 00:02:22,200 --> 00:02:27,360 Speaker 1: to regulate doctors. And interestingly, the cases that are getting 38 00:02:27,400 --> 00:02:31,000 Speaker 1: anywhere in terms of upholding the right for women to 39 00:02:31,160 --> 00:02:35,400 Speaker 1: see doctors are the doctor cases because the doctors have 40 00:02:35,480 --> 00:02:38,400 Speaker 1: a different set of arguments. They're arguing that we have 41 00:02:38,440 --> 00:02:42,480 Speaker 1: a right to practice medicine under the best standards. So 42 00:02:42,919 --> 00:02:47,520 Speaker 1: the case that you're talking about is really important from 43 00:02:47,560 --> 00:02:51,280 Speaker 1: a practical point of view. It's also hugely important from 44 00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:55,200 Speaker 1: a kind of abortion politics point of view. How did 45 00:02:55,200 --> 00:02:59,519 Speaker 1: the Fifth Circuit uphold this Louisiana law when the Supreme 46 00:02:59,560 --> 00:03:07,360 Speaker 1: Court decision involving Texas struck down a similar law in So, 47 00:03:07,720 --> 00:03:13,480 Speaker 1: isn't that Texas case the controlling authority or precedent here? Well, 48 00:03:13,560 --> 00:03:17,760 Speaker 1: it should be. The Texas case should indeed be the 49 00:03:17,880 --> 00:03:22,760 Speaker 1: controlling precedent, Which means that if the facts of a 50 00:03:22,840 --> 00:03:26,440 Speaker 1: preceding case are like the facts of a case that's 51 00:03:26,480 --> 00:03:29,280 Speaker 1: now before the court, the court is supposed to take 52 00:03:29,360 --> 00:03:33,399 Speaker 1: guidance from the earlier case. What the Fifth Circuit did 53 00:03:33,639 --> 00:03:37,840 Speaker 1: the federal court that governs the territory of Louisiana. What 54 00:03:37,880 --> 00:03:41,440 Speaker 1: they did was say, well, it's not exactly the same. 55 00:03:41,520 --> 00:03:46,440 Speaker 1: Louisiana is is smaller than Texas, for example, and so 56 00:03:46,760 --> 00:03:50,160 Speaker 1: while women may have had to travel further to find 57 00:03:50,160 --> 00:03:54,040 Speaker 1: a clinic with a doctor who had admitting privileges in Texas, 58 00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:58,720 Speaker 1: distances up to three miles. Louisiana is smaller, and we 59 00:03:58,760 --> 00:04:01,000 Speaker 1: don't think there's going to be that kind of problem. 60 00:04:01,280 --> 00:04:06,000 Speaker 1: So women aren't denied the ease of having an abortion 61 00:04:06,240 --> 00:04:10,680 Speaker 1: clinic nearby as badly as they would be. The fact 62 00:04:10,760 --> 00:04:14,040 Speaker 1: had shown in Texas that almost every clinic was going 63 00:04:14,120 --> 00:04:17,479 Speaker 1: to have to close because the hospitals were not even 64 00:04:17,520 --> 00:04:22,480 Speaker 1: granting admitting privileges to abortion providers. What your question is 65 00:04:22,600 --> 00:04:25,800 Speaker 1: getting at is how do you get around precedent? And 66 00:04:25,880 --> 00:04:28,720 Speaker 1: the way you get around precedent is to say, we 67 00:04:28,720 --> 00:04:31,760 Speaker 1: don't have to be guided by that case because our 68 00:04:31,839 --> 00:04:36,120 Speaker 1: facts are slightly different. That sixteen case where the Supreme 69 00:04:36,160 --> 00:04:38,840 Speaker 1: Court struck down the Texas law appeared to be at 70 00:04:38,880 --> 00:04:44,560 Speaker 1: the time of great victory for abortion rights. You're right 71 00:04:44,640 --> 00:04:47,120 Speaker 1: in saying that that appeared to be a great victory, 72 00:04:47,160 --> 00:04:50,159 Speaker 1: and in fact it was a great victory, last happy 73 00:04:50,279 --> 00:04:55,080 Speaker 1: day abortion advocates had since, and it was a victory 74 00:04:55,120 --> 00:04:59,720 Speaker 1: in several respects. First of all, it said enough with 75 00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:04,080 Speaker 1: these regulations, which have nothing to do with women's health. 76 00:05:04,600 --> 00:05:08,440 Speaker 1: The reason that the state can enact regulations is in 77 00:05:08,480 --> 00:05:11,560 Speaker 1: the interests of women's health. That's the very basis sort 78 00:05:11,600 --> 00:05:16,920 Speaker 1: of protecting the general welfare of state regulation, and the 79 00:05:17,279 --> 00:05:22,440 Speaker 1: lower court curred all this evidence which showed that requiring 80 00:05:22,480 --> 00:05:26,480 Speaker 1: admitting privileges was not good for women's health. In fact, 81 00:05:26,560 --> 00:05:29,680 Speaker 1: it was bad for women's health because it was causing 82 00:05:29,720 --> 00:05:33,400 Speaker 1: clinics to close, and the consequence of that was that 83 00:05:33,440 --> 00:05:37,160 Speaker 1: women had to travel huge differences to what the court 84 00:05:37,279 --> 00:05:42,559 Speaker 1: called overpacked facilities. The Court went on to say that 85 00:05:42,839 --> 00:05:46,359 Speaker 1: women are entitled to good medical care, and what we 86 00:05:46,440 --> 00:05:50,200 Speaker 1: want is individualized care. I've been talking with Professor Carol 87 00:05:50,279 --> 00:05:54,119 Speaker 1: Sanger of Columbia Law School about an upcoming abortion case 88 00:05:54,160 --> 00:05:57,200 Speaker 1: at the Supreme Court. It's the first abortion case to 89 00:05:57,240 --> 00:06:00,839 Speaker 1: be decided with a new conservative majority this term. The 90 00:06:00,880 --> 00:06:03,839 Speaker 1: Court will decide whether to strike down a Louisiana law 91 00:06:03,880 --> 00:06:07,600 Speaker 1: that requires doctors who perform abortions to get admitting privileges 92 00:06:07,680 --> 00:06:10,440 Speaker 1: at a local hospital. That law is similar to a 93 00:06:10,520 --> 00:06:13,479 Speaker 1: Texas measure the Court did strike down in twenty six. 94 00:06:14,160 --> 00:06:17,400 Speaker 1: The Trump administration has urged the Court to uphold the law, 95 00:06:17,680 --> 00:06:20,480 Speaker 1: and a brief by more than two hundred members of Congress, 96 00:06:20,560 --> 00:06:25,120 Speaker 1: almost all Republicans, urges the court to reconsider the landmark 97 00:06:25,279 --> 00:06:29,920 Speaker 1: nine seventy three Roe v. Wade abortion rights ruling so Carol, 98 00:06:29,960 --> 00:06:33,760 Speaker 1: we were discussing why that sixteen case appeared at the 99 00:06:33,839 --> 00:06:37,320 Speaker 1: time to be the biggest abortion rights victory in a generation. 100 00:06:37,920 --> 00:06:40,080 Speaker 1: So one of the reasons that the case has been 101 00:06:40,120 --> 00:06:44,280 Speaker 1: so important was it changed the emphasis entirely about what 102 00:06:44,360 --> 00:06:49,440 Speaker 1: abortion is, and it treated it as a medical procedure 103 00:06:50,080 --> 00:06:54,360 Speaker 1: rather than, you know, a borderline criminal act. It took 104 00:06:54,400 --> 00:06:58,839 Speaker 1: women as patients very seriously. So a pro choice abortion 105 00:06:58,880 --> 00:07:02,919 Speaker 1: advocates were we're very happy to have this affirmation about 106 00:07:03,160 --> 00:07:06,600 Speaker 1: sort of getting abortion back where it once had been, 107 00:07:06,760 --> 00:07:10,440 Speaker 1: which was as a medical procedure. That was very important. 108 00:07:10,640 --> 00:07:13,040 Speaker 1: The other thing that was important in the case is 109 00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:18,240 Speaker 1: kind of legal proposition. But it said states you can't 110 00:07:18,280 --> 00:07:22,720 Speaker 1: just come into court and say that this is good 111 00:07:22,760 --> 00:07:26,520 Speaker 1: for women's health. You have to prove it. No longer 112 00:07:26,800 --> 00:07:30,760 Speaker 1: do courts have to take what a state says at 113 00:07:30,840 --> 00:07:35,080 Speaker 1: face value. It doesn't have to give deference to state 114 00:07:35,160 --> 00:07:39,239 Speaker 1: declarations about what's good for women. Looking at the court 115 00:07:39,360 --> 00:07:43,000 Speaker 1: at the time, in the majority for striking down the 116 00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:47,200 Speaker 1: Texas law were Justices Briar, Ginsburg, so to Major, Kagan, 117 00:07:47,440 --> 00:07:53,680 Speaker 1: and Kennedy. In the minority were Justices Alito, Thomas, and Roberts. 118 00:07:54,000 --> 00:07:59,120 Speaker 1: Now you have on the court to additional justices Corsage 119 00:07:59,200 --> 00:08:05,200 Speaker 1: and Kavanaugh, which cement the conservative majority. So if you 120 00:08:05,320 --> 00:08:08,840 Speaker 1: just look at the numbers, does it appear that there 121 00:08:08,840 --> 00:08:13,560 Speaker 1: are enough justices on the court to uphold this law? Well, 122 00:08:13,840 --> 00:08:16,800 Speaker 1: guess it appears that there are enough justices on the 123 00:08:16,800 --> 00:08:22,480 Speaker 1: court now to overturn Row. Whether they will overturn Row 124 00:08:22,720 --> 00:08:25,720 Speaker 1: and do it on this case is a different question, 125 00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:31,280 Speaker 1: But I think there's a consensus that the numbers. The 126 00:08:31,360 --> 00:08:34,880 Speaker 1: numbers tell the story. And this is with no more 127 00:08:34,960 --> 00:08:39,280 Speaker 1: resignations or deaths on the court. So this really emphasizes 128 00:08:39,320 --> 00:08:43,640 Speaker 1: how much, how very important that the next presidential election 129 00:08:43,720 --> 00:08:46,800 Speaker 1: will be um as it is now. I think um 130 00:08:46,840 --> 00:08:51,280 Speaker 1: Trump has appointed of all federal judges at all levels, 131 00:08:51,400 --> 00:08:54,679 Speaker 1: from district courts to the Supreme Court, and we're beginning 132 00:08:54,679 --> 00:08:58,960 Speaker 1: to see the consequences of that as lower courts are 133 00:08:59,200 --> 00:09:03,600 Speaker 1: beginning to become more conservative as well. If the justices 134 00:09:03,679 --> 00:09:06,280 Speaker 1: decide just to rule on this case and not go 135 00:09:06,520 --> 00:09:11,680 Speaker 1: any further, would they have to overrule their own precedent 136 00:09:12,280 --> 00:09:16,760 Speaker 1: and say we were wrong in sen or would there 137 00:09:16,800 --> 00:09:19,800 Speaker 1: be another way that they could do it without overruling 138 00:09:20,160 --> 00:09:23,640 Speaker 1: the Texas case? Yes, there's a milder way that they 139 00:09:23,640 --> 00:09:26,640 Speaker 1: could go about it. They could say the Texas case 140 00:09:26,800 --> 00:09:30,319 Speaker 1: is not binding on the facts of the Louisiana case 141 00:09:31,000 --> 00:09:35,080 Speaker 1: because of the differences in the two states, the populations 142 00:09:35,240 --> 00:09:40,720 Speaker 1: where women live, where the clinics are located. They could 143 00:09:40,760 --> 00:09:44,440 Speaker 1: do that. That would be really pretty I don't want 144 00:09:44,440 --> 00:09:47,760 Speaker 1: to say shifty, but it would be pretty um playing 145 00:09:47,760 --> 00:09:52,000 Speaker 1: with the facts when the trial court in Louisiana case 146 00:09:52,440 --> 00:09:56,320 Speaker 1: also developed a very clear record that this was going 147 00:09:56,400 --> 00:10:01,760 Speaker 1: to close clinics, and there's really no Um, there's really 148 00:10:01,800 --> 00:10:05,280 Speaker 1: no argument that that's what legislators are trying to do 149 00:10:06,320 --> 00:10:10,520 Speaker 1: right now. Uh, state legislatures are going out of their 150 00:10:10,559 --> 00:10:14,960 Speaker 1: way to try to pass regulations that are so outrageous 151 00:10:15,080 --> 00:10:17,840 Speaker 1: that the Court will have to take the case. And 152 00:10:17,880 --> 00:10:21,360 Speaker 1: what they mean to do as with these admitting privileges regulations, 153 00:10:21,360 --> 00:10:25,360 Speaker 1: and this is this is really was your opening question. Um, 154 00:10:25,360 --> 00:10:31,800 Speaker 1: it's not really about admitting privileges. It's about dangling a situation, 155 00:10:32,200 --> 00:10:36,360 Speaker 1: dangling a case before the Supreme Court and saying, come on, 156 00:10:36,559 --> 00:10:40,960 Speaker 1: now's your chance. You can overturn the whole thing. You 157 00:10:41,000 --> 00:10:45,320 Speaker 1: don't have to just pickt one regulation and and say well, 158 00:10:45,400 --> 00:10:48,680 Speaker 1: that's no good, that's unconstitutional. You can go back to 159 00:10:48,840 --> 00:10:52,600 Speaker 1: kind of scratch to pre Row and assume assume that 160 00:10:52,679 --> 00:10:56,240 Speaker 1: you're deciding Row for the first time, and what they 161 00:10:56,280 --> 00:10:59,680 Speaker 1: would do then is say we think that Row was 162 00:11:00,000 --> 00:11:04,719 Speaker 1: wrong when it was decided, and it's wrong now. There 163 00:11:04,800 --> 00:11:07,960 Speaker 1: is a brief by more than two members of Congress, 164 00:11:08,000 --> 00:11:13,559 Speaker 1: almost all Republicans, urging the Court to reconsider Roe v. 165 00:11:13,720 --> 00:11:17,679 Speaker 1: Wade in this decision. But most legal experts, so I 166 00:11:17,720 --> 00:11:20,240 Speaker 1: don't know if you agree, but most legal experts seem 167 00:11:20,320 --> 00:11:23,080 Speaker 1: to think that the Court won't go that far. I 168 00:11:23,120 --> 00:11:25,800 Speaker 1: do agree with that. I think that it is it 169 00:11:25,960 --> 00:11:29,480 Speaker 1: is really too early. First of all, the timing of 170 00:11:29,520 --> 00:11:33,079 Speaker 1: the case would be before the election, so that we 171 00:11:33,120 --> 00:11:37,280 Speaker 1: would have a decision on this case before November. And 172 00:11:37,360 --> 00:11:42,800 Speaker 1: the Court is very aware of trying not to so 173 00:11:43,480 --> 00:11:48,720 Speaker 1: obviously get into the political uh the political machinations that 174 00:11:48,760 --> 00:11:52,239 Speaker 1: are going on now. The Court likes to present itself 175 00:11:52,480 --> 00:11:57,959 Speaker 1: as neutral and not have partisan politics that are guiding 176 00:11:57,960 --> 00:12:02,240 Speaker 1: its decision. So it has a huge institutional interest in 177 00:12:02,559 --> 00:12:05,480 Speaker 1: its own integrity. And the reason for that is that 178 00:12:05,559 --> 00:12:09,000 Speaker 1: the Court wants people to follow its decisions and to 179 00:12:09,040 --> 00:12:11,559 Speaker 1: have legitimacy. They have to say, listen, We're not on 180 00:12:11,559 --> 00:12:14,160 Speaker 1: one side or the other. We're just we're just deciding 181 00:12:14,200 --> 00:12:17,880 Speaker 1: the law, as though deciding the law was a completely 182 00:12:17,920 --> 00:12:22,240 Speaker 1: neutral thing. Um. But so that's one reason why I 183 00:12:22,280 --> 00:12:26,640 Speaker 1: think they would be very reluctant or loath to to 184 00:12:26,640 --> 00:12:30,400 Speaker 1: to kick out Row right now. The other thing is 185 00:12:30,960 --> 00:12:33,720 Speaker 1: another reason why they might hesitate to do that, is 186 00:12:34,080 --> 00:12:38,320 Speaker 1: it's not necessary to get rid of Row. You can 187 00:12:38,360 --> 00:12:40,520 Speaker 1: take care of the case. You can take care of 188 00:12:40,559 --> 00:12:43,040 Speaker 1: the issue that's been brought before the court, which is 189 00:12:43,640 --> 00:12:49,160 Speaker 1: are admitting villages in Louisiana governed by the two thousand 190 00:12:49,240 --> 00:12:51,719 Speaker 1: and sixteen case called the whole Women's Health that we've 191 00:12:51,760 --> 00:12:54,920 Speaker 1: been talking about from Texas. And so that's the Court 192 00:12:55,040 --> 00:12:59,080 Speaker 1: always has a sort of policy that it wants to 193 00:12:59,240 --> 00:13:03,160 Speaker 1: rule as a narrowly as it can. It doesn't want 194 00:13:03,160 --> 00:13:05,800 Speaker 1: to go any further than it has to do to 195 00:13:05,920 --> 00:13:10,400 Speaker 1: decide the case before before it. So it would be 196 00:13:10,480 --> 00:13:13,960 Speaker 1: taking a very big and bold step to say, you know, 197 00:13:14,240 --> 00:13:16,839 Speaker 1: it's just not good enough to rule on admitting privileges. 198 00:13:16,960 --> 00:13:20,319 Speaker 1: We're going to rule on the whole essence of Row. 199 00:13:20,800 --> 00:13:24,160 Speaker 1: We're going to make abortion of crime again. So how 200 00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:28,320 Speaker 1: would the justices go about getting to that point if 201 00:13:28,400 --> 00:13:31,400 Speaker 1: they decide that they are going to deal with ROW, 202 00:13:32,040 --> 00:13:34,200 Speaker 1: and deal with it, you know, go back to the 203 00:13:34,280 --> 00:13:38,960 Speaker 1: drawing board. What is very important is the grounds that 204 00:13:39,040 --> 00:13:44,280 Speaker 1: they announce for deciding that ROW is no longer good law. 205 00:13:45,040 --> 00:13:47,520 Speaker 1: And I think what most people expect them to do 206 00:13:48,200 --> 00:13:53,120 Speaker 1: is to say, we've reread ROW and we've decided. Their 207 00:13:53,160 --> 00:13:57,520 Speaker 1: big mistake in ROW is there is no privacy right 208 00:13:57,600 --> 00:14:02,160 Speaker 1: to privacy in the Federal Constitution, and that was their mistake. 209 00:14:02,280 --> 00:14:05,679 Speaker 1: They based the whole decision on the right to privacy, 210 00:14:05,720 --> 00:14:11,960 Speaker 1: which they some argue invented. Now many people, scholars and 211 00:14:11,960 --> 00:14:15,600 Speaker 1: so on, I think that privacy is not an invention. 212 00:14:15,679 --> 00:14:18,360 Speaker 1: That we have all kinds of examples of privacy, Like 213 00:14:18,640 --> 00:14:21,640 Speaker 1: you can't have your your house search without a search 214 00:14:21,840 --> 00:14:25,280 Speaker 1: warrant by by the state officers. And that's an example 215 00:14:25,320 --> 00:14:29,480 Speaker 1: of the kinds of privacy that citizens can can expect. 216 00:14:29,760 --> 00:14:33,680 Speaker 1: Even though this Constitution doesn't mention the word privacy, it 217 00:14:33,760 --> 00:14:37,360 Speaker 1: says citizens have the right to be secure in their homes. 218 00:14:37,400 --> 00:14:39,720 Speaker 1: But that's that's what they'd have to say. They'd have 219 00:14:39,840 --> 00:14:45,560 Speaker 1: to say, Um, privacy is does not extend to things 220 00:14:45,640 --> 00:14:49,400 Speaker 1: like deciding about abortion. That's just not that just carries 221 00:14:49,440 --> 00:14:51,960 Speaker 1: it all too far. So that would be a way 222 00:14:52,120 --> 00:14:55,480 Speaker 1: for the for the Supreme Court to say, so states, 223 00:14:55,560 --> 00:14:58,560 Speaker 1: it's back in your it's back in your court again. 224 00:14:59,040 --> 00:15:01,960 Speaker 1: All the states get to decide again as it was 225 00:15:02,120 --> 00:15:06,200 Speaker 1: prior to Row, whether they want to make abortion a crime, 226 00:15:06,920 --> 00:15:11,400 Speaker 1: because states have the right to decide what are crimes 227 00:15:11,440 --> 00:15:14,240 Speaker 1: in their states. So let me ask you this then, 228 00:15:14,760 --> 00:15:18,360 Speaker 1: looking at all the circumstances that you mentioned here, all 229 00:15:18,360 --> 00:15:21,680 Speaker 1: the factors, what do you think the court is likely 230 00:15:21,720 --> 00:15:25,960 Speaker 1: to do? Do you think they're likely to uphold the 231 00:15:26,000 --> 00:15:29,320 Speaker 1: Louisiana law or strike it down? I think that the 232 00:15:29,360 --> 00:15:34,520 Speaker 1: Court will uphold the Louisiana law, which would be how 233 00:15:34,560 --> 00:15:38,360 Speaker 1: they've gone about ruling on abortion regulations. In a number 234 00:15:38,360 --> 00:15:42,720 Speaker 1: of other circumstances. They'll say, you know, the Texas case 235 00:15:43,480 --> 00:15:47,800 Speaker 1: doesn't cover everything in Louisiana, and we think that that 236 00:15:47,840 --> 00:15:51,800 Speaker 1: we may have made an overstatement. Is how they'll put it. 237 00:15:52,280 --> 00:15:55,040 Speaker 1: For example, the part about courts don't have to rely 238 00:15:55,480 --> 00:15:59,800 Speaker 1: totally on what state legislatures say. They can say, well, 239 00:16:00,040 --> 00:16:03,640 Speaker 1: not so fast. We think that state legislatures are entitled 240 00:16:03,920 --> 00:16:07,880 Speaker 1: to deference in their lawmaking. That's what a democracy is. 241 00:16:08,440 --> 00:16:11,760 Speaker 1: So there are ways that they can adjust and cut 242 00:16:11,800 --> 00:16:15,680 Speaker 1: back on whole women's health. And that's what I think 243 00:16:15,680 --> 00:16:18,800 Speaker 1: they'll do. Now, that's not what the brief you mentioned 244 00:16:18,880 --> 00:16:22,440 Speaker 1: wants them to do. The members of Congress, it's not 245 00:16:22,520 --> 00:16:25,600 Speaker 1: what a number of governors have come out and say, 246 00:16:25,680 --> 00:16:29,960 Speaker 1: we want to encourage the Court to overrule Row. But 247 00:16:30,080 --> 00:16:33,880 Speaker 1: I think that it's too early. UM. I don't think 248 00:16:33,920 --> 00:16:38,160 Speaker 1: that Justice Roberts is keen to be the guy who's 249 00:16:38,160 --> 00:16:41,840 Speaker 1: going to criminalize Row at this stage. Thanks so much 250 00:16:41,840 --> 00:16:44,640 Speaker 1: for being on Bloomberg Law. Carol. That's Carol Sanger, a 251 00:16:44,760 --> 00:16:47,560 Speaker 1: professor at Columbia Law School. And that's it for this 252 00:16:47,720 --> 00:16:51,280 Speaker 1: edition of Bloomberg Law. I'm June Grosso. Thanks so much 253 00:16:51,320 --> 00:16:54,240 Speaker 1: for listening, and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law 254 00:16:54,280 --> 00:16:58,480 Speaker 1: Show weeknights at ten pm Eastern, seven pm Central, right 255 00:16:58,480 --> 00:16:59,800 Speaker 1: here on Bloomberg Radio.