Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Abortion Clinic Regulations

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-3 against the Texas pro-life law that required physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and required clinics to meet hospital-like standards for outpatient surgery.

Matthew Clark, with the American Center for Law and Justice, explains to CBN News why the Supreme Court ruling is another example of "abortion distortion." Watch above.

Texas lawmakers argued the measure Rick Perry signed in 2013 was needed to protect women's health. It required abortion doctors and clinics to meet the same standards for other doctors, clinics and hospitals in the state.

Justice Stephen Breyer disagreed with the requirements.

"The surgical requirement like the admitting privileges requirement, provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions and constitutes an 'undue burden' on their constitutional right to do so," he said.

Pro-Lifers: Supreme Court Ruling a 'Sad Day' for Women

Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined in agreement with Breyer.

Chief Justice John Roberts, and justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas disagreed.

Thomas said the court's decision "exemplifies the court's troubling tendency to bend the rules when any effort to limit abortion, or even speak in opposition to abortion, is at issue."

The law when first signed cut the number of clinics from 40 to 20. Had it taken full effect the 20 would have been cut in half.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, founder and CEO of Whole Women's Health, led the challenge.

"Every day Whole Women's Health treats our patients with compassion, respect and dignity – and today the Supreme Court did the same. We're thrilled that today justice was served and our clinics stay open," she said.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton also commented on the ruling on Twitter, saying it was a "victory for women in Texas and across America."

"The fight isn't over. The next president has to protect women's health. Women won't be 'punished' for exercising their basic rights," Clinton added.

The Center for Reproductive Rights says the decision could have "far reaching implications." It represents "a clear statement by the court about what the standard should be in these types of cases," Julie Rikelman, director of the litigation group, said.

Twenty-two states currently have facility requirements that are similar or the exact same as the requirements for ambulatory surgical centers.

According to The Washington Post the ruling will cast a "long shadow" among states with similar laws.