Supreme court cases dealing with abortion...?
What are some supreme court cases (or other landmark cases) that deal with abortion, not including Roe V. Wade?
- Anonymous1 decade agoBest Answer
Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court overturning the abortion law of Georgia. The Supreme Court's decision was released on January 22, 1973, the same day as the decision in the more well-known case of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
H. L. v. Matheson was a United States abortion rights case (March 23, 1981), according to which a state may require a doctor to inform a teenaged girl's parents before performing an abortion or face criminal penalty.
City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 462 U.S. 416 (1983), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court affirmed its abortion rights jurisprudence. The case, decided June 15, 1983, struck down an Ohio abortion law requiring a 24-hour wait following counseling, which includes the statement "the unborn child is a human life from the moment of conception".
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision on July 3, 1989 that some believe in part compromised Roe v. Wade's protection of abortion rights. Specifically, it approved a Missouri law that imposed restrictions on the use of state funds, facilities and employees in performing, assisting with, or counseling on abortions. The Supreme Court thus allowed for states to legislate in an area that had been previously been thought to be forbidden under Roe.
Hodgson v. Minnesota was a United States abortion rights case (June 25, 1990), according to which a state law may require notification of both parents before a minor can obtain an abortion, as long as a judicial alternative is present.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the constitutionality of several Pennsylvania state regulations regarding abortion was challenged. The Court's lead plurality opinion upheld the right to have an abortion but lowered the standard for analyzing restrictions of that right, invalidating one regulation but upholding the others
Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic was a United States abortion rights case (January 13, 1993), which affirmed that Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 could not be used to halt blockades of abortion clinics.
Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York, 519 U.S. 357 (1997), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court. It ruled in an 8-1 decision that speech-free "buffer zones" around abortion clinics were constitutional. The Court held that "fixed buffer zones" were constitutional, but "floating buffer zones" were not.
Paul Schenck challenged a Federal District Court injunction that restricted anti-abortion "sidewalk counselors" from approaching abortion clinic clients and others with Bibles, tracts and anti-abortion message. The Court rules in Schenck's favor, striking down the restrictions as a fundamental violation of the First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech.
Full citation: 519 U.S. 357, 117 S. Ct. 855 (1997).
Stenberg, Attorney General of Nebraska, et al. v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000), is a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with a Nebraska law which made performing "partial-birth abortion" illegal, unless necessary to save the mother's life. Nebraska physicians who performed the procedure contrary to the law were subject to having their medical licenses revoked. Nebraska, like many states, banned the procedure on the basis of public morality. The Court struck down the law, finding the Nebraska statute criminalizing "partial birth abortion[s]" violated the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. This case dealt with previability second trimester abortions, whereas most abortions occur during the first trimester
McCorvey v. Hill, 385 F.3d 846 (5th Cir. 2004), was a case in which one of the original litigants in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) Norma McCorvey requested the overturning of Roe. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that McCorvey could not do this; the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari on February 22, 2005, , rendering the opinion of the Fifth Circuit final. The opinion for the Fifth Circuit was written by Judge Edith Jones, who also filed a concurrence to her opinion for the court.
Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood, 546 U.S. 320 (2006), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving a facial challenge to New Hampshire's parental notification abortion law. The First Circuit had ruled that the law was unconstitutional and an injunction against its enforcement was proper. The Supreme Court vacated this judgment and remanded the case, but avoided a substantive ruling on the challenged law or a reconsideration of prior Supreme Court abortion precedent. Instead, the Court only addressed the issue of remedy, holding that invalidating a statute in its entirety "is not always necessary or justified, for lower courts may be able to render narrower declaratory and injunctive relief."
Gonzales v. Carhart is a United States Supreme Court case brought before the Court for oral arguments on November 8, 2006. This case involves the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has appealed a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit striking down this statute. Also before the Supreme Court is the companion case of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood which is being appealed from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which also struck down the statute.
This case may lead to reversal or affirmation of Stenberg v. Carhart (2000), in which the Court dealt with similar issues. Like Stenberg did, the present case deals with pre-viability second trimester abortions, whereas most abortions occur during the first trimester. Unlike Stenberg, however, the plaintiffs in the present case argue that the type of abortion at issue is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment (applicable to the federal government) instead of the Fourteenth Amendment (applicable to the states).
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, 1976.
Bellotti v. Baird II, 1979.
Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 1983.
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 1989.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1992.