This is excellent news, that I forgot to post yesterday. The proposed law would have closed the state's last clinic (which would be a fucking disaster, given that Louisiana is about to lose most of our clinics because of a similar law).

I get a little confused about which courts are in charge of what, and what this actually might turn out to be; I heard on the radio yesterday that the reason for the court blocking the law was pretty literally that it deprives Mississippians of a legal medical practice. I was listening to local news, so basically they were talking about how it might affect Louisiana - they said that Louisiana (or any state) will likely never be able to shut down every single clinic as long as abortion is legal. My only issue with that reasoning, is how can they not, then, say that there should be plenty of clinics available everywhere? One in Mississippi is hardly helpful to the majority of the women there, particularly the marginalized ones.

Advertisement

The law, as far as I can tell, is still technically upheld. Louisiana is about to suffer the consequences of a similar law - about admitting privileges to hospitals - as has Texas. All the quotes in the linked article that talk about how the courts found the extra driving distance does not make an "undue burden" - ugh.

What's also strange, is apparently, in the passage of this law, Mississsippi's lawmakers want to encourage women to visit nearby metropolitan areas instead of having an abortion at home. This doesn't sound much like a *safety* regulation, if you are encouraging your women to go to supposedly "unsafe" abortion clinics. The holes in the arguments are...appalling. Do they think they're tricking anyone? It's just anti-choicers being anti-choice and finding legal loopholes to further their agenda.