On Monday, June 29, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo affirming, just as it did in 2016 in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, that a law requiring physicians who provide abortion to obtain local hospital admitting privileges places an unconstitutional burden on patients’ access to care. In reaching this result, the Court cited the brief ACOG led with 13 major medical organizations in recognizing that the requirements at issue in the case offer no medical benefit. You can read the full statement on the result from ACOG CEO Dr. Maureen Phipps.
ACOG applauds the Court’s continued consideration of the expert views of the nation’s medical community in reaching its result. ACOG is also pleased that the Court sustained the long-held principle of “third party standing”— whether physicians may advocate on behalf of their patients by asserting their patients’ rights in this context.
It is important to recognize that many women already encounter significant barriers to care, and Black women and women of color continue to face systemic inequities that burden or delay their ability to obtain essential services. It is also important to recognize that, while positive, this decision will likely not stop some states from enacting harmful restrictions. For more information about the case and opportunities to join our advocacy for equitable, evidence-based care, you can go to our June Medical Services v. Russo page.