Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf
Page Number: 9

4 

JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C. v. RUSSO 

Opinion of BREYER, J. 

further  than  thirty  miles  from  the  location  at  which  the 
abortion is performed or induced and that provides obstet-
rical or gynecological health care services.”  La. Rev. Stat. 
Ann. §40:1061.10(A)(2)(a).

The statute defines “active admitting privileges” to mean 
that the doctor must be “a member in good standing” of the
hospital’s “medical staff . . . with the ability to admit a pa-
tient and to provide diagnostic and surgical services to such
patient.”  Ibid.; La. Admin. Code, tit. 48, pt. I, §4401.  Fail-
ure to comply may lead to fines of up to $4,000 per violation,
license  revocation,  and  civil  liability.    See  ibid.;  La.  Rev. 
Stat. Ann. §40:1061.29. 

B 
A few weeks before Act 620 was to take effect in Septem-
ber 2014, three abortion clinics and two abortion providers 
filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court.  They alleged that 
Act 620 was unconstitutional because (among other things) 
it imposed an undue burden on the right of their patients to
obtain an abortion.  App. 24.  The court later consolidated 
their lawsuit with a similar, separate action brought by two 
other  clinics  and  two  other  abortion  providers.    (Like  the 
courts below, we shall refer to the two doctors in the first 
case as Doe 1 and Doe 2; we shall refer to the two doctors in 
the second case as Doe 5 and Doe 6; and we shall refer to 
two other doctors then practicing in Louisiana as Doe 3 and
Doe 4.)

The plaintiffs immediately asked the District Court to is-
sue a temporary restraining order (TRO), followed by a pre-
liminary injunction that would prevent the law from taking 
effect.  June Medical Services LLC v. Caldwell, No. 14–cv– 
00525 (MD La., Aug. 22, 2014), Doc. No. 5. 

The State of Louisiana, appearing for the defendant Sec-
retary of the Department of Health and Hospitals, filed a 
response that opposed the plaintiffs’ TRO request.  App. 32– 
39.  But the State went on to say that, if the court granted