Americans United for Life | Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
page,page-id-15703,page-template-default,symple-shortcodes ,symple-shortcodes-responsive,ajax_updown_fade,page_not_loaded

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, formerly Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, and before that known as Whole Woman’s Health v. Lakey is the most significant abortion case before the Supreme Court in decades. This historical case provides an important opportunity for the Supreme Court to affirm its support of laws that protect women’s health. After more than four decades of the abortion industry’s opposition to meaningful oversight, the Supreme Court must unequivocally affirm that it meant what it has said as far back as Roe: states may regulate abortion to protect a mother’s health.

Below you will find the latest commentary and press releases from AUL on the case.

Latest Commentary from AUL

Fox News: The Supreme Court, Texas law and the abortion industry

Denise Burke | Mar. 2, 2016

It’s an election year and, not surprisingly, the national debate over abortion is heating up. However, this year’s dominant battle is taking place not on the campaign trail, but in the Supreme Court. On March 2, the Court will take up its first abortion case in nearly a decade when it hears oral arguments in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, a challenge to health and safety standards for abortion clinics. At issue in this landmark case is the abortion industry’s right to remain and operate in the proverbial “back alley.” [Continue Reading]

The Hill: Schumer was right: The Senate can refuse to fill a vacancy

Clarke D. Forsythe | February 29, 2016

Since Justice Scalia’s death, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has been channeling Captain Renault in Casablanca by being “Shocked! Shocked!” that Senate Republicans might not consider any replacement before the end of President Obama’s term.But, in a speech to the uber-liberal American Constitution Society in July 2007, Schumer said he would recommend to his fellow Democrats “that we should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances.” That was 18 months before the end of President Bush’s term. [Continue Reading]

The Daily Caller: Why Should Abortion Clinics Be Exempt From Protecting Patients?

Clarke Forsythe | Mar. 1, 2016

The requirement that doctors in ambulatory surgical centers have “admitting privileges” at a nearby hospital is a standard of patient safety. “Admitting privileges” doesn’t refer to some Old-Boy Network. They are a long-standing practice in American medicine, tied to credentialing of physician skill, competency, and record of safety. They assure a basic level of safety for the patient in the ambulatory facility. And they were not invented by pro-life advocates. [Continue Reading]

The Federalist: Abortion Providers Argue For Back Alley Abortions

Mailee Smith | Feb. 3, 2016

When the Supreme Court reviews the Texas abortion case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (formerly Cole), abortion providers’ deadly game will have prompted a discussion about what is more important: “access” to the current back alley of abortion now offered by an industry that puts profits over people, or commonsense health and safety standards the Court has historically supported. The stakes are high—life and death—and encompass more than whether the Texas provisions in House Bill (HB) 2 are constitutional. [Continue Reading]

SCOTUSblog: Symposium: Will the Supreme Court deliver a decisive victory for women’s health and safety?

Mailee Smith | Jan. 4, 2016

Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole is about more than applying ambulatory surgical center standards and admitting privileges to Texas abortion clinics. While these provisions of Texas House Bill (HB) 2, enacted in 2013, are certainly front and center in the case, what is at stake is the very standard that federal courts will use to review abortion regulations. The Supreme Court will be considering whether a state can enact rational abortion regulations aimed at protecting the health and safety of women, or whether it will reverse its previous decisions and require states to preemptively prove the absolute effectiveness of a safety regulation, even before that regulation goes into effect. [Continue Reading]

Washington Times: Restoring mother-child bonds that Roe v. Wade damaged

Denise Burke | Jan. 12, 2016

Roe v. Wade is built on a foundation of lies, handed down by an unelected Supreme Court with sweeping disregard for the views of ordinary Americans. As the 43rd anniversary of this controversial decision nears, Americans United for Life and its pro-life allies continue to expose the dangerous falsehoods propagated by an unrepentant abortion industry desperate to sustain Roe and its legacy of under-regulated, undersupervised abortion on demand, even in the face of clear evidence of abortion’s harms to mothers and destruction of their unborn children. [Continue Reading]

Huffington Post: How A Supreme Court Ruling On Abortion Could Wreak Havoc In The States

Denise Burke | Nov. 16, 2015

Even when the Supreme Court in 1973 ruled that women had a constitutional right to have an abortion in the Roe v. Wade case, it made it clear that states could regulate clinics, said Denise Burke, American United for Life’s vice president of legal affairs. If Texas wins in the high court, “it will give additional encouragement to states to follow Texas’ lead,” Burke said. She cited Nebraska and Ohio as states that would be among those most likely to enact new laws. [Continue Reading]

The Federalist: Supreme Court Review Puts Abortion At A Crossroads

Denise Burke | Nov. 16, 2015

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear its first abortion case since 2007, when it upheld the federal ban on partial-birth abortion. Regardless of how the court ultimately rules, abortion is at a crossroads in America. At issue is whether what happens to a woman once she goes behind the closed doors of an abortion clinic matters, whether the veneer of the Constitution will protect medically substandard abortion facilities, and whether the abortion industry will be permitted to keep profits high by keeping standards low. [Continue Reading]

National Review: Fifth Circuit Strikes Blow against Big Abortion

Mailee Smith | June 11, 2015

The Fifth Circuit’s decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole has Big Abortion reeling. For years, the abortion lobby has used the false argument of “access” to put its business interests ahead of women’s health and safety, and has consistently opposed any and all commonsense health and safety measures. In addition, it has misread and misrepresented the abortion jurisprudence of the U.S. Supreme Court since Roe v. Wade. [Continue Reading]

The Federalist: Texas May Once Again Change Abortion Law For The Entire Country

Denise Burke | Jan. 23, 2015

Texas is again at the forefront of the continuing national debate over abortion. In January 1973, the Supreme Court struck down Texas’ prohibition on abortion in Roe v. Wade, unleashing an extreme abortion-on-demand agenda that has claimed more than 50 million children and left millions of American women at the mercy of an under-scrutinized, inadequately regulated, and profit-driven abortion industry. However, another Texas abortion law may soon offer the Court a chance at judicial redemption. [Continue Reading]


Latest Press Releases from AUL


Press Release: Supreme Court Rejects Texas Health and Safety Standards for Abortion Clinics; AUL says Fight to Protect Women from Predatory Abortion Industry Continues

Jun. 27, 2016

“Women lost today as the Supreme Court sides with the abortion industry, putting profits over women’s health and safety by opposing life-saving regulations and medically endorsed standards of patient care. Sadly, the commonsense laws that protect women in real, full service healthcare centers won’t be in effect in Texas abortion clinics, but Americans United for Life will continue to fight – in legislatures and in the courts – to protect women from a dangerous and greedy abortion industry,” said AUL Acting President and Senior Counsel Clarke Forsythe. He made his remarks as the U.S. Supreme Court in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt struck down Texas requirements that abortion clinics comply with the same health and safety standards as facilities performing other outpatient surgeries and that individual abortion providers maintain hospital-admitting privileges to facilitate the treatment of abortion complications. [Continue Reading]

Press Release: Abortion Industry Would Rather Invest Money in Lawyers than Women’s Health

Mar. 2, 2016

Americans United for Life, the nation’s leading advocate for protecting women’s health through commonsense legislation, and co-counsel with The Bioethics Defense Fund in an amicus curie (friend of the court) brief in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, (formerly known asWhole Woman’s Health v. Cole) will be at the U.S. Supreme Court today as ground breaking health and safety standards get their day in the highest court in the land. AUL legal experts are available to discuss the heath and safety standards that have become law nationwide, such as those found in AUL’s innovative Women’s Protection Project and Infants’ Protection Project. “The Texas law provides a template for the nation’s officeholders who care about what happens to women behind the closed doors of abortion clinics,” said AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs Denise Burke. “Abortion advocates argue that ‘access’ to whatever they choose to sell trumps women’s health and safety, but abortion harms women. Every day, women are put at risk in abortion clinics in part because the abortion industry will invest in lawyers but not in health and safety standards.” [Continue Reading]

Press Release: AUL Represents State Legislators in Historic Supreme Court Case, Fights to Protect Health and Safety Standards for Women Vulnerable to Abortion Industry Abuses

Feb. 3, 2016

Americans United for Life, the nation’s leading advocate of protecting women’s health through commonsense legislation, filed an amicus curie (friend of the court) brief today, along with co-counsel the Bioethics Defense Fund, in the most significant abortion case before the Supreme Court in decades, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, formerly known as Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole. On the brief, AUL represents legislators from across the nation and demonstrates to the Court that state efforts to protect women through reasonable health and safety standards must be upheld for reasons of common sense and medical reality. “At every turn, the abortion industry fights health and safety standards that offer real protection to women, going to court to keep profits high and standards low and ignoring the severe medical risks to women exposed to the reality of abortion in America,” said AUL President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “AUL’s legal team is proud to stand with men and women from across the country – more than 460 Republicans and Democrats – who are working to protect life in law in their states.” [Continue Reading]

Press Release: 5th Circuit Protects Women’s Health with Ruling Holding Texas Abortionists to Real Medical Standards

June 9, 2015

In a sweeping victory for women, the Fifth Circuit has upheld a Texas law requiring that abortion clinics meet the same health and safety standards as facilities that provide other outpatient surgeries. In a per curiam decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Lakey, the Court found that the medical requirement advances Texas’ interests in safeguarding maternal health and protecting women from substandard abortion facilities and practices. “Texas has struck a decisive blow for women’s health and safety against a predatory abortion industry,” said Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “A largely under-monitored, under-supervised, and secretive abortion industry tells women ‘trust but don’t verify that our clinics are clean and safe.’ No longer should women be abandoned to self-serving and false assurances from an industry that puts profits over people.” [Continue Reading]

Press Release: AUL Supports Texas in Efforts to Protect Women from Dangerous Conditions in Abortion Clinics

Nov. 10, 2014

Americans United for Life filed an amicus curiae (friend-of-the-court) brief today arguing that a high-profile Texas law requiring that abortion clinics meet basic health and safety standards is needed to protect women and is constitutional. “The abortion industry puts profits over people,” observed AUL’s President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest. “Ironic isn’t it that the people who say they support ‘safe’ abortions actively work against the most basic health and safety standards in court, protecting abortionists’ profits rather than women. [Continue Reading]

Press Release: Women Win As Texas Health and Safety Standards Go to Work in Abortion Clinics, says AUL

Oct. 2, 2014

A law requiring abortion clinics to meet the same medical standards as other facilities performing outpatient surgeries, and requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges should emergency care be needed, will go into effect immediately in Texas as a result of a U.S. 5th Circuit Court decision late Thursday. The appeals court panel disagreed with a lower court judge who ruled that the health and safety standards could not go into effect while the constitutional issues were being litigated. [Continue Reading]

Press Release: AUL Files Briefs Supporting Texas and Mississippi Abortion Laws

Nov. 25, 2013

Americans United for Life (AUL) filed briefs today in two important abortion cases now before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Each case involves recently enacted laws designed to protect women from the dangers inherent in America’s largely unregulated, unrestricted, and unrepentant abortion industry. [Continue Reading]

Press Release: Americans United for Life Applauds Life-Saving Law, Championed by the Texas House, Senate and Governor Rick Perry

July 13, 2013

Americans United for Life President and CEO, Dr. Charmaine Yoest, praised Texas Governor Rick Perry and members of the state House and Senate “for protecting the lives and health of women too often victimized in abortion clinics.” She noted the heroic efforts of the Texas Legislature and Governor in going into a special session to consider legislation aimed at reining in an unmonitored, unregulated and unsupervised abortion industry, as well as legislation based on AUL-model legislation that would require life-ending drugs to be administered only by following FDA protocols. [Continue Reading]

Return to Top