In a press call with the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) today, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton decried this morning’s Supreme Court’s decision overturning two state laws that raised the medical standards for abortion facilities. In Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt, the Court ruled 5-3 that raising the medical standards of abortion facilities to those of other outpatient surgical centers and requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals unduly burdened women’s access to abortion.

This isn’t an irrelevant requirement. An estimated 10 women per week in Texas are taken by ambulance to hospitals after going to abortion facilities. The injuries include punctured uteruses and colons, hemorrhaging, and septic shock. Four per week have to be hospitalized.

Despite the abortionists’ claims that the law, every major metropolitan center in Texas still has an abortion facility, Paxton told The Stream. Rural areas, which already had fewer facilities before the law, can be served by doctors because those who perform under 50 abortions a year were not included in the law. “I think the percentages were close to 90 percent within 150 miles of an abortion clinic. And so, we felt like if a woman wanted an abortion, she had all the access she could possibly have in our state.”

Sub-Standard and Fly-By-Night

ADF Senior Counsel Steve Aden also responded to The Stream’s question. “Writing for the dissent, Justice Alito said, essentially, the abortion distortion is back. I think Justice Alito is right, because what the Supreme Court said was, in essence, if a law, whether it be legitimate or not, … if that law closes too many clinics, it’s a burden. That wasn’t what the Court originally intended the standard to be, and I don’t think that’s the standard that helps safety and health of women.”

“It’s a sad day,” continued Aden, noting that “if you’re operating sub-standard and fly-by-night, then, yes it’s going to be hard to stay in business when legitimate health and safety regulations come along.”

Aden’s words echoed those of Texas Right to Life legislative director John Seago, who had told The Stream just days before the decision that abortion facilities’ decision to not improve their safety standards in accord with the 2013 laws was the “slackers’ vote.”

The fact that the facilities decided to close their doors instead of comply with state health and safety laws may helped lower the number of abortions in Texas, said Seago, but “this is caused by the abortion industry itself, not pro-life Texans. There are hundreds of non-abortion health centers in Texas that follow these same medical standards every day.”

According to Seago, “if the court sides with the abortion industry, [justices] are signaling to all clinics in the country that in order to challenge any basic, common sense health and safety standards, abortion advocates only have to argue they would rather close their doors than follow state law.”

A Legitimate Interest

Abortion groups and their allies have accused Texas of wasting taxpayer dollars by defending the two laws. Asked to respond to that accusation in light of the Court’s 5-3 decision, Paxton told The Stream that “we did what we needed to do to protect life in this case, and protect women’s health. I don’t think our state is ever going to apologize for trying to accomplish those goals.”

“Remember,” continued Paxton, who was in the legislature when it sent the regulations to then-Governor Rick Perry, “this was an elected body that overwhelmingly passed this legislation signed by the governor. These people were put in place by the people of Texas, and they have every right, and they have a legitimate interest, in protecting the unborn and the lives of women who choose these procedures.”

For commentary on the decision, see Deacon Keith Fournier’s Whole Woman’s Health Supreme Court Case is a Disaster for Mothers, Children and the Right to Life.