Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf
Page Number: 33

28 

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

Opinion of BREYER, J. 

attended  by  the  children  of  a  former  colleague,  who  then 
stopped  performing  abortions  as  a  result.  Record  14036– 
14037. 

With his own experience and their existing relationship 
in mind, Doe 5 could have reasonably thought that, if this 
doctor  wouldn’t  serve  as  his  covering  physician,  no  one 
would.  And it was well within the District Court’s discre-
tion  to  credit  that  reading  of  the  record.    Cf.  Cooper,  581 
U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 4).  Doe 5’s testimony was inter-
nally  consistent  and  consistent  with  what  the  District 
Court  called  the  “mountain  of  un-contradicted  and  un-ob-
jected to evidence” in the record that supported its general 
finding “that opposition to abortion can present a major, if 
not insurmountable hurdle, for an applicant getting the re-
quired covering physician,” including Doe 3’s similar expe-
rience.  250 F. Supp. 3d, at 51, 49; see id., at 51–53; App.
200–202. 

The Court of Appeals did not address this general finding 
or  the  evidence  the  District  Court  relied  on  to  support  it,
and neither do our dissenting colleagues.  Cf. post, at 20–21 
(opinion of ALITO, J.); post, at 12 (opinion of GORSUCH, J.).
The Court of Appeals pointed to what it described as Doe 
4’s  testimony  that  “finding  a  covering  physician  is  not 
overly burdensome.”  905 F. 3d, at 809.  Doe 4’s actual tes-
timony was that he did not believe requiring doctors to ob-
tain a covering physician was “an overburdensome require-
ment for admitting privileges.”  Record 14154.  In context, 
that statement is most naturally read as saying that such a 
requirement was reasonable, not that it was easy to fulfill. 
In fact, Doe 4 testified that he had been unable to apply to 
two hospitals for admitting privileges because he could not 
find a covering physician.  Id., at 14154–14155.  Moreover, 
Doe 4’s statement referred to his efforts to obtain admitting
privileges in New Orleans, not in Baton Rouge.  Ibid.  Doe 5 
testified that he could more easily find a covering physician