Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-463_3ebh.pdf
Page Number: 36

Cite as:  595 U. S. ____ (2021) 

1 

SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part 
Opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 21–463 
_________________ 

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. 
AUSTIN REEVE JACKSON, JUDGE, DISTRICT 
COURT OF TEXAS, 114TH DISTRICT, ET AL. 

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

[December 10, 2021] 

  JUSTICE  SOTOMAYOR,  with  whom  JUSTICE  BREYER  and 
JUSTICE  KAGAN  join,  concurring  in  the  judgment  in  part 
and dissenting in part. 
  For nearly three months, the Texas Legislature has sub-
stantially  suspended  a  constitutional  guarantee:  a  preg-
nant  woman’s  right  to  control  her  own  body.    See  Roe  v. 
Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973); Planned Parenthood of South-
eastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833 (1992).  In open defiance 
of this Court’s precedents, Texas enacted Senate Bill 8 (S. 
B. 8), which bans abortion starting approximately six weeks 
after a woman’s last menstrual period, well before the point 
of fetal viability.  Since S. B. 8 went into effect on September 
1,  2021,  the  law  has  threatened  abortion  care  providers 
with  the  prospect  of  essentially  unlimited  suits  for  dam-
ages, brought anywhere in Texas by private bounty hunt-
ers,  for  taking  any  action  to  assist  women  in  exercising 
their constitutional right to choose.  The chilling effect has 
been near total, depriving pregnant women in Texas of vir-
tually  all  opportunity  to  seek  abortion  care  within  their 
home  State  after  their  sixth  week  of  pregnancy.    Some 
women  have  vindicated  their  rights  by  traveling  out  of 
State.  For the many women who are unable to do so, their 
only  alternatives  are  to  carry  unwanted  pregnancies  to