In one of the most significant abortion rulings in a decade, the Supreme Court decided Monday that a Texas law requiring abortion clinics to meet the same medical standards as ambulatory surgical facilities was unconstitutional. In a 5-3 decision, the court overcame its ideological split and delivered a blow to pro-life groups who hoped to at least clean up the careless, dangerous abortion industry if they couldn’t outlaw it altogether.

“We agree with the District Court that the surgical center 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,” wrote Justice Stephen Breyer for the majority.

Dissenting were Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and John Roberts.

“When we decide cases on particularly controversial issues, we should take special care to apply settled procedural rules in a neutral manner,” wrote Alito. “The Court has not done that here.”

Presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton said the ruling was a “victory for women.”

“This fight isn’t over,” she wrote on Twitter. “The next president has to protect women’s health. Women won’t be ‘punished’ for exercising their basic rights.”

The ruling will compel Texas and other states to once again set the abortion industry loose, powerless to impose even the mildest regulatory restrictions on this, ahem, “basic right.” Liberals are no longer content with legal abortion; they want to turn it – legally and psychologically – into a procedure no more controversial than wart removal. Women’s health? Are you serious?

Well, once again, this is a reminder of what’s at stake in this election. Even with the court evenly split between conservatives and liberals, we are getting decisions like this one. Now imagine what things will look like after Hillary Clinton has a chance to put a judge in Antonin Scalia’s chair.