Earlier this month, the Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana abortion restriction. Named the Louisiana Unsafe Abortion Protection Act, the law prohibits doctors from performing abortions if they don’t have admitting privileges in a nearby hospital. The court case which was created in response to the act, June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, was taken to the Supreme Court where the justices reversed the 5th Circuit’s decision to keep the Louisiana Unsafe Abortion Protection Act. The law makes it harder to get an abortion because the amount of eligible doctors is significantly lessened.

The law resembles a Texas abortion restriction which was deemed unconstitutional in the case of Whole Womens Health v. Hellerstedt. The law was struck down four years ago because it placed an “undue burden” on women seeking an abortion. Planned Parenthood v. Casey ultimately determined that states couldn’t pass regulations that create a substantial obstacle in a women’s path to receive an abortion though they could pass legislation to dissuade women from getting one. This precedent led to the fall of the Texas and Louisiana law in recent years.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative leaning judge, sided with liberal judges as the 5th vote in a 5-4 decision. Justice Roberts used the Texas precedent to guide his ultimate decision. Since Roe v. Wade, states cannot outlaw abortions, however, some states impose restrictions which make getting abortions more difficult. As these restrictions move to higher courts, the debate is still prevalent; are abortion rights human rights?