Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Decision

Majority Leader Osborne Statement on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Decision

Concord, NH – NH House Majority Leader Jason Osborne (R-Auburn) issued the following statement following the Supreme Court of the United States decision in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case:

“Last year, we passed legislation that put limits on the most extreme and unnecessary late-term abortions. A majority of Granite Staters and Americans oppose the idea of allowing abortion up until the very moment of birth, and our laws now affirm that sentiment. This year, the House passed additional legislation that upheld our basic values regarding this issue on a unanimous bipartisan vote. While today’s ruling returning complete authority over abortion back to the states where it belongs is a great triumph for Federalism, it does nothing to change the accessibility of these services in New Hampshire.”




Chief Justice Roberts writes majority opinion in Maine case reinforcing a parent’s freedom to direct the education of their children

WASHINGTON, D.C. —  In a victory for students across the nation, the U.S. Supreme Court just validated parents’ constitutionally-protected right to direct the education of their children.

The 6-3 decision in Carson v Makin reads in part that “once a state decides to subsidize private education it cannot disqualify some private schools because they are religious.” Maine created a tuition assistance program so that students living in communities without state-run public schools would have options, but they limited those options to secular schools. The case was brought by three families who filed a lawsuit in federal court arguing that the “nonsectarian” requirement violates the Constitution. Today the High Court agreed. 

The decision reaffirms the Court’s findings in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that “a benefit program under which private citizens ‘direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice’ does not offend the Establishment Clause.”

Former Solicitor General and counsel to CER Paul Clement said that, “The decision certainly creates further momentum in the direction that any statute that limits relief to non-sectarian schools is in trouble and… reaffirms what was already clear from Espinoza.” Clement’s legal guidance to states in “Making the Most of Espinoza to Advance Education Opportunity,” is a seminal publication for state lawmakers wanting to remove the last vestiges of discrimination caused by “Blaine” amendments. In the coming days, CER will be monitoring further expert review of the decision and sharing with states how they can act to allow parents to fully choose the education that best meets their children’s needs.

For more information on the constitutionality of education choice and court decisions striking down Blaine Amendments, visit CER’s Blaine microsite