"The [Texas] decision has injected so much hope into the pro-choice movement in Pennsylvania and across the whole country really, it's been a long time since we've had that kind of good news," Frietsche said. The ruling means that a health regulation aimed at abortion care must consider both its burden and benefits. When the "supposed purpose" of the restriction is to protect women's health, the law has to actually do that, she said. "I'm certain that some of the provisions that have been enforced [in Pennsylvania] can't stand up to the Whole Women's Health standard, and I expect that there will be providers who will be challenging them in one form or another," she said.
Read Full Article »
