Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf
Page Number: 97

16 

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

ALITO, J., dissenting 

good-faith effort to obtain privileges, and the Court now af-
firms that holding.  Ante, at 27.  It is painfully obvious, how-
ever, that Doe 2 did not act in the way one would expect if 
compliance with Act 620 had been to his benefit. 

E-mails in the record reveal that Doe 2 only half-heartedly 
applied for privileges, did so on the advice of counsel, and
calculated that an outright denial would be best for his legal 
challenge.  See  App.  1452  (“The  lawyers  think  it  is  im-
portant that I at least have an application pending at a hos-
pital”);  id.,  at  1453  (“It  may,  however,  be  more  important
from a legal challenge standpoint against this Bill just to
have  an  application  pending  or  even  denied”  (emphasis
added)).

Consistent with this attitude, Doe 2 declined to apply for
privileges at a Shreveport-area hospital, Christus Health,
where he previously had privileges while performing abor-
tions offsite and where another doctor who performed abor-
tions, Doe 3, maintained privileges.  Id., at 382.  Doe 2 knew 
that  Doe  3  had  privileges  at  Christus  Health,  a  hospital 
that grants “courtesy privileges,” which allow doctors to ad-
mit patients but do not require a minimum number of ad-
missions.  See id., at 406; Record 12125 (bylaws). 

Doe 2’s stated reasons for not applying to Christus Health
are not reasons that are likely to have deterred an individ-
ual  with  a  strong  personal  incentive  to  obtain  privileges.
He testified that Christus is a Catholic hospital and that he 
did  not  apply  there  for  that  reason.    App.  405–406.  He 
added  that  he  applied  to  other  hospitals  where  he  “knew 
people and might feel more comfortable,” “places that [he]
thought meant something” and where he would have “the
highest likelihood” of obtaining privileges.  Id., at 454.  A 
person with a strong personal incentive to get privileges is 
not likely to have found these reasons sufficient to justify
failing even to apply. 

The District Court did not address Doe 2’s failure to apply