I thought the notorious RBG laid the hammer down with this exchange during oral arguments...

 

<p style="font-family:verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">MR. KELLER: Justice Ginsburg, JA 242 provides that 25 percent of Texas women of reproductive age are not within 100 miles of an ASC. But that would not include McAllen that got as­applied relief, and it would not include El Paso, where the Santa Teresa, New Mexico facility is.

<p style="font-family:verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">JUSTICE GINSBURG: That's--that's odd that you point to the New Mexico facility. New Mexico doesn't have any surgical--ASC requirement, and it doesn't have any admitting requirement. So if your argument is right, then New Mexico is not an available way out for Texas because Texas says to protect our women, we need these things. But send them off to Mexico--New Mexico--New Mexico where they don't get it either, no admitting privileges, no ASC. And that's perfectly all right. Well, if that's all right for the--the women in the El Paso area, why isn't it right for the rest of the women in Texas?

<p style="font-family:verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">MR. KELLER: The policy set by Texas is that the standard of care for abortion clinics should rise to the level of ASCs for clinics, and admitting privileges for doctors. Texas obviously can't tell New Mexico how to regulate, but the substantial obstacle inquiry examines whether there is the ability to make the ultimate decision or elect the procedure. And when there's--

<p style="font-family:verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">JUSTICE GINSBURG: Then why should it count those clinics?

---