From the ACLU, this is at Liberty.

I'm Emerson Sykes, a staff attorney here at the ACLU and your host.

Abortion access is under attack again.

The Supreme Court just heard arguments in June medical services versus Rousseau.

The case will decide whether or not a Louisiana law that requires abortion providers to have the ability to admit patients to a nearby hospital is constitutional.

If allowed to go forward, that requirement will decimate access to abortion and open up the floodgates for similar laws in

other states. Joining us on the podcast are two of my colleagues from the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom

Project, Bridget Amiri and Andy Beck, who just left the arguments and are eager to share what they

heard. Bridget and Andy, thanks for joining us. Welcome to the podcast. Thank you for having us.

Yes, thank you.

So you have just left the Supreme Court. You just heard the argument in June Medical Services versus Rousseau.

Before we get into the details of that argument, can you just tell us this was a case about a trap law?

What is a trap law?

So a trap law, the word trap, stands for

targeted regulation of abortion provider. And what that is is a law that purports to be about

protecting patient health through a health regulation, but is in fact a unique onerous

requirement imposed on abortion clinics that are designed as part of an

anti-abortion strategy by anti-abortion politicians to close down clinics and make it impossible for them

to keep their doors open. And so the trap law issue in this case is an admitting privileges law,

which may sound familiar to folks because it's the exact same type of trap law that was

before the Supreme Court a few years ago in a different case.

You mentioned that the Supreme Court has actually already looked at these trap laws in a case

...