Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf
Page Number: 62

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

Nos. 18–1323 and 18–1460 
_________________ 

18–1323 

JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C., ET AL., 
PETITIONERS 
v. 
STEPHEN RUSSO, INTERIM SECRETARY, 
LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HOSPITALS 

STEPHEN RUSSO, INTERIM SECRETARY, 
LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HOSPITALS, PETITIONER 
v. 
JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C., ET AL. 

18–1460 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

[June 29, 2020] 

JUSTICE THOMAS, dissenting. 
Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded
abortion  jurisprudence  by  enjoining  a  perfectly  legitimate 
state law and doing so without jurisdiction.  As is often the 
case with legal challenges to abortion regulations, this suit
was brought by abortionists and abortion clinics.  Their sole 
claim before this Court is that Louisiana’s law violates the 
purported  substantive  due  process  right  of  a  woman  to 
abort  her  unborn  child.  But  they  concede  that  this  right
does not belong to them, and they seek to vindicate no pri-
vate rights of their own.  Under a proper understanding of 
Article III, these plaintiffs lack standing to invoke our ju-
risdiction.