Court Proceeding Against Petitioners at the Women Health Center

The law states that everyone has the right to live without interference from others and should not be unlawfully restrained.

- The overwhelming majority of abortion clinic—88%—experienced at least one form of harassment in 2008. 87% reported picketing, 42% were picketing with patient blocking, and 21% cited incidents of vandalism. And more shockingly, nearly one-fifth of all of the largest abortion facilities reported a bomb threat. (Jones, 2011)

The Court utilized “the most rigid” scrutiny and the evaluation of the intent of the exclusion law to rule that the Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34 was constitutional. The Court also applied the

In the case of Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas v. Abbott (2014), The American Civil Liberties Union, The Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and a Texas law firm filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of several women’s health-care providers in Texas for seeking to enforce their rights and those of patients for declaratory judgment and pertaining to the regulation of surgical abortions and abortion-inducing drugs by enjoining two provisions of the 2013 Texas House Bill No. 2. (Planned Parent Hood v. Abbott, 2014). To many, Planned Parenthood challenges the state of Texas abortion law as it places an unconstitutional restriction on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. It also

The issue of abortion is one of the most controversial topics of our time, but recently the amount of public interest has grown exponentially. A number of bills regarding this policy issue such as Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015 and Child Interstate Notification Act have both greatly influenced the public’s opinion of abortion. Although, the issue of abortion hasn’t always been like this; according to Timeline of Abortion Laws and Events, an article from the Chicago Tribune, “The earliest anti-abortion laws were intended to protect women from untrained abortionists.” (Timeline) Since the 1973 passing of the Supreme Court Case, Roe V Wade, women have been able to obtain the abortion procedure in all 50 states, 46 of which were

Here, it is clear that the blood screening would constitute a Fourth Amendment search and seizure of Fang’s person. Therefore, to prevail on her claim for injunctive relief or to invalidate the ordinance, Fang must show that the ordinance is unreasonable to achieve its stated objectives. As stated by the major of Hadselltown, the ordinance seeks to “save the city millions in schooling costs by preventing additionally mentally challenged children from being born.” It accomplishes this objective by mandating genetic testing of all pregnant woman prior to obtaining medical services in the county. The blood samples collected are also donated to a research facility nearby for further study and development of ways to prevent developmental and mental disabilities prior to or at birth. Fang will argue that mandating that she allow a doctor to draw her blood and for her to receive information about the potential for a mentally or developmentally disabled child causes

Women’s rights have always been underestimated. One aspect of women’s rights that receives a lot of attention is reproductive rights. Often times, people think of reproductive rights and automatically think of abortion, but, reproductive rights can include many things like abortion and birth control/ contraceptives, etc. Although reproductive rights are for both men and women, women often have a harder time exercising their rights. The famous 1973 case of Roe v. Wade made history in women’s reproductive rights by legalizing abortion, its efforts for abortion to not be criminalized were reached and allowed women to receive abortions without being criminalized. Yet, since 1973 there has been many efforts that set up undue burdens which have strained the rights of many women. There have been many social groups that work towards both side of the spectrum of reproductive rights like: Pro-Choice and Pro-Life. Campaigns, which work as political or social organizers that strive towards achieving a particular thing or area, have made the efforts to fight for the reproductive rights that they believe in. Furthermore, there are many key campaigns that work towards a specific aspect of reproductive rights. For example, Planned Parenthood Action typically fights for birth control, while NRLA usually fights for the rights of women to be able to decided if they want the abortion or not, the National Right to Life (NRLC) fights for abortions to be illegal and tries to influence people into

My views mirror the majority opinion on this case, because I thought the regulation decree was unconstitutional. I do believe that a city may have an interest in passing laws diminishing behavior for the public's health and safety. Nonetheless, I do not think this was the case; the law was not constricted enough in Pinellas Park. It did not include all sensible exemptions, and it definitely didn't target only events most likely to end up in crime. Rather, I think Pinella Park was doing the contrary; the unorthodox opinion, on the other hand, felt that the regulation decree was constitutional. They thought it was reasonable, also pointing out that I, along with the majority, interpreted the law too strictly than it was actually. Furthermore, the minority judge did not agree that minors had the right to assembly in public places during late hours, the judge demanded there had to be an adult with them.

Ruling: The district court held that Kuhlmeier’s First Amendment freedom of speech rights were not violated. The Eight Circuit of Appeals reversed the lower court’s ruling. Appeal was made to the

The major constitutional issue this case deals with is the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially

The Village of Euclid claimed the ordinance was adopted under the police power delegated by the State of Ohio to protect the public health, safety and morals, and welfare. On the other hand, the appellee alleged the ordinance was a violation of the fourteenth amendment. The remedy for the taking was limited to nonmonetary relief, and demanded an injunction restraining the enforcement of the zoning ordinance.

In response to the disapproval of Planned Parenthood in government, protesters flooded the streets advocating for reproductive and sexual health care for everyone. Since Planned Parenthood is a separate entity from regular healthcare and it covers specific needs,

Jill E. Adams  is the founding executive director of the Center on Reproductive Rights and Justice at Berkeley Law.  Before joining Berkeley Law she was the executive director of Law Students for Reproductive Justice for six years. She was one of 37 Soldiers of Social Change in San Francisco Magazine’s annual power issue, she is the youngest person to have received the Wallace Alexander Gerbode Fellowship for nonprofit leadership award. This piece is about the legalities of abortions and how the law is regulated and funded for. This

Held 5-4 (Brennan writing) affirming the ruling of the Texas Court of Appeals expressive conduct intended to express an idea shall fall under the umbrella of the First and Fourteenth Amendments thus any restriction must show a substantial governmental interest to be valid.

Today women have more rights than they have ever had, but it came at a price. Over 40 years ago a case brought before the U.S. Supreme Court laid the foundation for women who wanted to have a choice, this choice was abortion. The famous case Roe v. Wade paved the path for women all over the United States to make their choice in the matter of pregnancy. However, there have been several activist groups that feel no matter what this is wrong, these groups result to violence that have been said to be a form a domestic terrorism. In 2003, Norma McCorvy, know has Jane Roe in the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade, changed her