State Attorneys General Amicus Brief
- Amici are 21 States and the District of Columbia.
- These states argue that Whole Woman’s Health correctly held that a state restriction on abortion cannot survive constitutional scrutiny if it imposes greater burdens than benefits. Under this precedent, states are obligated to do more than merely identify a permissible governmental interest, they must proffer credible evidence demonstrating the law actually advances the asserted interest.
- Louisiana’s law is invalid because – like the law in Texas – it purports to promote women’s health, but in fact fails to do so.
- Amici further argue that reliance on Supreme Court precedent establishing a constitutional minimum is important for State policymakers. States devote substantial resources to improving health care outcomes for all women, against the backdrop of a federal constitutional floor that protects abortion access in every state. Departing from well-established federal constitutional protection would undermine these States’ reasoned policy judgments and interest in advancing women’s health.