<P> Justice Breyer wrote that "We have found nothing in Texas' record evidence that shows that, compared to prior law (which required a "working arrangement" with a doctor with admitting privileges), the new law advanced Texas' legitimate interest in protecting women's health ." He noted that, when asked at oral argument whether Texas knew of a single instance in which the new requirement would have helped even one woman obtain better treatment, Texas admitted that there was no evidence in the record of such a case . He found that, if H.B. 2 were allowed to take full effect, the number of Texan women living more than 200 miles from the nearest abortion clinic would increase from 10,000 to 750,000 (a 7,400% increase). </P> <P> Justice Breyer dismissed the state's claim that the Pennsylvania case of Kermit Gosnell justified additional regulation: "Gosnell's behavior was terribly wrong . But there is no reason to believe that an extra layer of regulation would have affected that behavior . Determined wrongdoers, already ignoring existing statutes and safety measures, are unlikely to be convinced to adopt safe practices by a new overlay of regulations . Regardless, Gosnell's deplorable crimes could escape detection only because his facility went uninspected for more than 15 years . Pre-existing Texas law already contained numerous detailed regulations covering abortion facilities, including a requirement that facilities be inspected at least annually ." </P> <P> In a two - page concurrence, Justice Ginsburg wrote, "Many medical procedures, including childbirth, are far more dangerous to patients, yet are not subject to ambulatory surgical - center or hospital admitting - privileges requirements...Given those realities, it is beyond rational belief that H.B. 2 could genuinely protect the health of women, and certain that the law' would simply make it more difficult for them to obtain abortions .'...When a State severely limits access to safe and legal procedures, women in desperate circumstances may resort to unlicensed rogue practitioners...(L) aws like H.B. 2 that' do little or nothing for health, but rather strew impediments to abortion' cannot survive judicial inspection ." </P> <P> Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, stating that the majority "reimagines the undue - burden standard" for abortion access, creating a "benefits - and - burdens balancing test" that courts should have instead deferred to the legislatures to resolve . Justice Alito, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas, filed a second dissenting opinion, arguing that there is no direct causal link between the Texas law and the closings of abortion clinics, and they may have also been affected by the withdrawal of state funds, declining demand for abortions, and retirements of doctors . Alito also stated that Texas might well have been motivated to protect women by the Kermit Gosnell case in Pennsylvania, in which a doctor had been convicted on three charges of murder and one of manslaughter . </P>

What was the texas law at issue in this case