WASHINGTON _ The Supreme Court announced Friday it will hear an abortion case from Louisiana and decide whether the state may close down clinics if their doctors do not have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.
The case does not call for overturning Roe vs. Wade or upholding bans on abortion. But the election-year ruling will signal whether the court's conservative majority is ready to give states far more leeway to strictly regulate abortion, even if doing so has the effect of shutting down all the clinics that perform abortions.
The dispute could recast the legal standard set for abortion by the court in 1992. Led by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the court said at that time that states may regulate abortion so long as they did not put an "undue burden" on women who seek an abortion prior to the third trimester of a pregnancy.
But ever since, judges and states have been sharply divided over what that means and which regulations are permissible.
Abortion-rights advocates said the Louisiana law, if put into effect, would leave the state with only one doctor who may perform abortions. They alleged most hospitals avoid controversy by refusing to grant admitting privileges to doctors who perform abortions. And their lawyers pointed to the Supreme Court's ruling in 2016 which, by a 5-3 vote, struck down an identical law from Texas.
The court said then the admitting privileges rule put an undue burden on women in rural parts of Texas because it had the effect of closing all the abortion providers outside of the major cities, including Dallas and Houston. But the narrow majority included Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who retired last year.
To the surprise of abortion-rights lawyers, a conservative appeals court in New Orleans upheld the Louisiana law last year and said it would not put an undue burden on many women. It did so by asserting that doctors probably could obtain admitting privileges if they persisted.
Lawyers for the Louisiana clinics filed an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court. And in February, the justices issued a temporary order on a 5-4 vote blocking the Louisiana law from taking effect. Chief Justice John G. Roberts cast his vote with four liberal justices, while the four conservatives dissented.
Throughout his career, Roberts has regularly opposed abortion rights, but has not said whether he would overturn Roe vs. Wade if given the opportunity.
The court's order in February kept the Louisiana law on hold while lawyers on both sides could file briefs opposing or supporting the appeals court's decision.
Oral arguments in June Medical Services vs. Gee are likely to be held next year.
