In an important decision today (in Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center), the Kentucky supreme court has ruled by a vote of 4 to 3 that the abortion clinics challenging two Kentucky laws against abortion did not have third-party standing to present their patients’ constitutional claims against the laws. As to the claims that the abortion clinics could assert on their own behalf (first-party standing) against one of the laws, the court ruled that those claims did not warrant the trial court’s grant of injunctive relief.

Kudos to Kentucky attorney general Daniel Cameron.

If you’re trying to parse the four separate opinions that each concur in part and dissent in part, note that three of the opinions reject the lead opinion’s position against third-party standing while the fourth (by Justice Nickell) agrees with it—and would go further to hold that the abortion clinics also did not have first-party standing on any of its claims.

I wrote here about the trial court’s wild ruling enjoining both laws last July. An intermediate appellate court dissolved the trial court’s injunction. So the effect of today’s ruling is to allow Kentucky’s laws to continue to remain in force.

Today’s ruling does not address the merits of potential claims by women seeking abortion that the two abortion laws violate the state constitution. Look for opponents of those laws to find pregnant women to file new lawsuits.