The first oral arguments of pro-lifers vs. abortion activists were heard in the US Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The Texas House Bill 2, which mandates safety requirements for clinics providing abortions was challenged at the highest court in the Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt case.
Eight judges presided over the hearing concerning the bill that was passed in 2013.
The law makes it imperative for doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges to near-by hospitals in emergency cases, and to have similar medical facilities as outpatient surgical clinics to help the patient get immediate assistance in botched abortions.
After the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the court is left with eight judges, with a possibility of tie, which would validate the lower court ruling of upholding the Texas law.
The Fifth Circuit Court had ruled favorably almost all aspects of the law, but enforced an injunction from the law to be implemented in the state.
Last November, when the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, Steven Aden, asserted that the new requirements are meant for the safety of the women. "Abortionists should not be exempt from medical requirements that everyone else is required to follow," he said.
Legislative director of Texas Right to Life, John Seago, told the Christian Post that there was an apparent chasm between the three conservative and four liberal judges at the hearing.
"We saw that Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan were very aggressive. They were very outspoken in trying to undermine the solicitor general's arguments for the law, but overall it was a good hour of arguments and we think that the state did a good job of defending the law."
"Justice Kennedy was going to be critical when we had Justice Scalia on the court. However even now we still depend upon him to side with the other three conservative Justices to have a four-four tie," Seago said.
