Facts of the Case
The Pennsylvania legislature amended its abortion control law in 1988 and 1989. Among the new provisions, the law required informed consent and a 24 hour waiting period prior to the procedure. A minor seeking an abortion required the consent of one parent (the law allows for a judicial bypass procedure). A married woman seeking an abortion had to indicate that she notified her husband of her intention to abort the fetus. These provisions were challenged by several abortion clinics and physicians. A federal appeals court upheld all the provisions except for the husband notification requirement.
Questions
Can a state require women who want an abortion to obtain informed consent, wait 24 hours, if married, notify their husbands, and, if minors, obtain parental consent, without violating their right to abortion as guaranteed by Roe v. Wade?
Conclusions
-
In a bitter 5-to-4 decision, the Court again reaffirmed Roe, but it upheld most of the Pennsylvania provisions. For the first time, the justices imposed a new standard to determine the validity of laws restricting abortions. The new standard asks whether a state abortion regulation has the purpose or effect of imposing an "undue burden," which is defined as a "substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability." Under this standard, the only provision to fail the undue-burden test was the husband notification requirement. In a rare step, the opinion for the Court was crafted and authored by three justices: O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter.
A Federal Gestational Age Abortion Ban is the Wrong (and Unconstitutional) Hill for the Pro-Life Movement to Die On
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, decided in June 2022, the Supreme Court overruled...
Rights Talk in a Post-Liberal Age: Mary Ann Glendon's Enduring Insight Into the American Rights Tradition
Federalist Society Review, Volume 23
Gross human rights violations occur every day, often invisibly to most of us. Media coverage...
Dobbs: Looking Back, Looking Forward
Dobbs was a major decision and has created much discussion. The Federalist Society has covered...
How Would Burke Decide Dobbs?
Edmund Burke is getting a revival these days in the Supreme Court. The Chief cited...
The Religious Question and Abortion
Yesterday the Supreme Court heard argument in Dobbs et al., v. Jackson Women’s Health, a...
In Dobbs v. Jackson, History is On Mississippi's Side
This post originally appeared at Newsweek and is being republished here with permission. The Supreme...
The Gordian Knot of Abortion Jurisprudence
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
On December 1, the Supreme Court will hear argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health...
Should the “Hollow Core” of Constitutional Theory Be Filled with the Framers’ Intentions?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
A Review of The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory: Why We Need the Framers, by...
Originalism as King
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
A review of The President Who Would Not Be King: Executive Power under the Constitution,...
Last Hurrah for the Minimalist Court?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
A review of SCOTUS 2020: Major Decisions and Developments of the U.S. Supreme Court, edited...
How the Founders’ Natural Law Theory Illuminates the Original Meaning of Free Exercise
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, the Supreme Court will consider whether Philadelphia’s 2018 policy...
A Circuit Split Emerges on Post-June Medical Abortion Standards
The Federalist Society is pleased to announce its Student Blog Initiative, a project of the...
The Supreme Court Takes Up Abortion: What You Need to Know About June Medical Services v. Gee
Federalist Society Review, Volume 20
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Is It Time to Revisit the Constitutionality of Unauthorized Practice of Law Rules?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 20
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
AG Watch: Planned Parenthood v. Jegley
On May 29, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Planned Parenthood v. Jegley, a case...
The Texas Abortion Case in the Supreme Court: Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt Oral Argument Preview - Podcast
Litigation and Religious Liberties Practice Groups Podcast
On March 2, 2016 the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Whole Woman’s Health v....
Oklahoma Supreme Court Strikes Down Informed Consent Law
State Court Docket Watch Article, Spring 2013
On December 4, 2012, in Nova Health Systems v. Pruitt, 2012 OK 103 (Okla. 2012),...
Sleeping Giant?: Section Two of the Thirteenth Amendment, Hate Crimes Legislation, and Academia’s Favorite New Vehicle for the Expansion of Federal Power
Engage Volume 13, Issue 3 October 2012
A brief look at the Thirteenth Amendment might suggest that it has rather limited application...
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Vacates Trial Court's Denial of a Minor's Application to Obtain an Abortion
State Court Docket Watch Spring 2012
On December 22, 2011, in a case of first impression,1 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated...
Duties to the Unborn: Alabama Supreme Court Deems Viability Irrelevant to Fetal Wrongful-Death Actions
State Court Docket Watch Fall 2011
April Mack sued to recover for the wrongful death of her unborn child, who miscarried...
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act
Online Debate
On April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban...
Abortion and the Courts
Online Debate
The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, passed by...
The Independent Counsel Act: An Unconstitutional Delegation of Power of Judges
Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 3, Issue 1, Spring 1999
A defense lawyer for one of the targets of a federal independent counsel probe gave...
The RFRA Decision: A Blow for Judicial Supremacy and Against Religious Freedom
Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 1, Issue 3, Fall 1997
It does not often happen that a "conservative" Supreme Court manages, in a single decision,...
Whether There is a Constitutional Right to Die
Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 1, Issue 2, Spring 1997
The existence of a constitutional right to die is currently under consideration by the United...
Romer v. Evans: The Supreme Court's Assault on Popular Sovereignty
Civil Rights Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 1, Issue 1, Fall 1996
Four years ago, the voters of Colorado enacted by referendum a state constitutional amendment (known...
Special Session I: Dobbs, Roe, Casey, and the Rule of Law
2022 National Lawyers Convention
The Mayflower Hotel1127 Connecticut Ave NW
Washington, DC 20006
Litigating Dobbs: Originalism, Stare Decisis, and Overturning Precedent
Orlando Lawyers Chapter
University Club of Orlando150 E Central Blvd
Orlando, FL 32801