Abortion providers in Texas argued in the Supreme Court on Wednesday against a sweeping law that would force clinics to meet stringent standards for facilities that perform the procedure. In the video above, “Democracy Now!” speaks with protesters outside the court.

Read a primer on Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt here.

The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia less than three weeks ago left the Supreme Court with only eight justices and opened the way for a 4-4 tie in the case, which many consider the most important abortion case in a generation. The tie could leave in place a lower court ruling largely upholding the Texas law, potentially impacting other states in the same appeals court circuit—Mississippi, which has just one abortion clinic, and Louisiana, where a similar admitting-privileges law threatens to close all but one clinic in the state.

During the arguments on Wednesday, the Supreme Court’s three women led the criticism of the Texas abortion restrictions. Ruth Bader Ginsburg questioned the Texas argument that the restrictions don’t create an undue burden because women can travel to a clinic across state lines in New Mexico, where such restrictions are not in place. “That’s odd that you point to the New Mexico facility,” Ginsburg said. “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 New Mexico … and that’s perfectly all right.”

In the video below, “Democracy Now!” speaks with Jessica Mason Pieklo, senior legal analyst and vice president of Law and the Courts at RH Reality Check.

—Adapted from “Democracy Now!” by Alexander Reed Kelly.