Planned Parenthood v. Casey
· Case: Planned Parenthood v. Casey
· Year: 1992
· Result: 5-4, favor Planned Parenthood
· Related constitutional issue/amendment: Amendment 14: Due Process Clause
· Civil rights or Civil liberties: Civil Liberties
· Significance/ Precedent: For the first time, the justices imposed a new standard to determine the laws restricting
abortions. The new standard asks whether a state abortion regulation has a burden on pregnant women or poses an obstacle for a woman seeking an abortion. However, the husband must be notified.
· Quote from majority opinion: The opinion for the Court was unique: It was crafted and authored by three justices.
“At issue in these cases are five provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982, as amended in 1988 and 1989.... The Act [section 3205] requires that a woman seeking an abortion give her informed consent prior to the abortion procedure, and specifies that she be provided with certain information at least 24 hours before the abortion is performed. For a minor to obtain an abortion, the Act [section 3206] requires the informed consent of one of her parents, but provides for a judicial bypass option if the minor does not wish to or cannot obtain a parent's consent. Another provision of the Act [section 3209] requires that, unless certain exceptions apply, a married woman seeking an abortion must sign a statement indicating that she has notified her husband of her intended abortion. The Act exempts compliance with these three requirements in the event of a "medical emergency," which is defined in [section] 3203 of the Act...
…it must be stated at the outset and with clarity that Roe's essential holding, the holding we reaffirm, has three parts. First is recognition of the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without undue interference from the State. Before viability, the State's interests are not strong enough to support a prohibition of abortion or the imposition of a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure. Second is a confirmation of the State's power to restrict abortions after fetal viability if the law contains exceptions for pregnancies which endanger the woman's life or health. And third is the principle that the State has legitimate interests from the outset of the pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman and the life of the fetus thatmay become a child. These principles do not contradict one another; and we adhere to each.”
· Illustration/image: See Below
· 6-word summary: rights of abortion, have spouse consent.
· Year: 1992
· Result: 5-4, favor Planned Parenthood
· Related constitutional issue/amendment: Amendment 14: Due Process Clause
· Civil rights or Civil liberties: Civil Liberties
· Significance/ Precedent: For the first time, the justices imposed a new standard to determine the laws restricting
abortions. The new standard asks whether a state abortion regulation has a burden on pregnant women or poses an obstacle for a woman seeking an abortion. However, the husband must be notified.
· Quote from majority opinion: The opinion for the Court was unique: It was crafted and authored by three justices.
“At issue in these cases are five provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982, as amended in 1988 and 1989.... The Act [section 3205] requires that a woman seeking an abortion give her informed consent prior to the abortion procedure, and specifies that she be provided with certain information at least 24 hours before the abortion is performed. For a minor to obtain an abortion, the Act [section 3206] requires the informed consent of one of her parents, but provides for a judicial bypass option if the minor does not wish to or cannot obtain a parent's consent. Another provision of the Act [section 3209] requires that, unless certain exceptions apply, a married woman seeking an abortion must sign a statement indicating that she has notified her husband of her intended abortion. The Act exempts compliance with these three requirements in the event of a "medical emergency," which is defined in [section] 3203 of the Act...
…it must be stated at the outset and with clarity that Roe's essential holding, the holding we reaffirm, has three parts. First is recognition of the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without undue interference from the State. Before viability, the State's interests are not strong enough to support a prohibition of abortion or the imposition of a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure. Second is a confirmation of the State's power to restrict abortions after fetal viability if the law contains exceptions for pregnancies which endanger the woman's life or health. And third is the principle that the State has legitimate interests from the outset of the pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman and the life of the fetus thatmay become a child. These principles do not contradict one another; and we adhere to each.”
· Illustration/image: See Below
· 6-word summary: rights of abortion, have spouse consent.