Essay Planned Parenthood Vs. Caey (1992)

When Roe v. Wade reached the Supreme Court, it received great interest from all over the country. On December 13, 1971 the case was first argued in front of the judges, but on this day only seven judges were present. The seven judges present decided that this case was so important that the case needed to be reargued when the two new judges were present in the Court. On October 10, 1972 the lawyers repeated their arguments to all 9 of the Supreme Court judges and on January 22, 1973 the decision was made (Brannen and Hanes, 2001).

The landmark "Roe v. Wade" ruling began an era of nationally sanctioned abortion rights and a new wave of controversy (History). The controversy often took shape as court cases aimed at reversal. Two pivotal cases were: The Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth and the Supreme Court declares a statute that requires parental and spousal consent for abortions unconstitutional.

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

Abortion was still causing problems ten years after the Roe v. Wade case decision. The decision caused division and created virtually two groups. As a result of the decision relating to abortion two types of groups emerged pro-life and pro-choice. “The pro-life group feels women should not have an abortion; whereas pro-choice believes the woman herself should have the right to decide if she wants an abortion” (Brannen et al 788). “Pennsylvania law issue in Casey regulated abortion requiring physicians to provide women with information about fetal development and alternative to abortions” (Brannen et al). The

One of the other plaintiffs was Hallford, a doctor facing criminal charges for violating state abortion laws. The other plaintiff was a married couple without children, the Does. The Does were seeking an injunction against the enforcement of the laws because they were unconstitutional. The Texas Federal Court which was composed of a panel of three judges did find the law to be unconstitutional based on the Ninth Amendment. The Ninth Amendment states: The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. This Amendment has helped to establish a Constitutional right to privacy. Texas Federal Court ruled that the laws were too vague and therefore violated the Constitutional rights of the plaintiffs. Wade appealed this decision to the United States Supreme

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

In Roe v. Wade, in 1973, the Supreme Court held a case that a pregnant woman has the full privacy right to have an abortion. The right to abortion is not guaranteed and must be stable against the State’s countervailing benefits in keeping the health of the woman and in protecting the life of the unborn child. The State’s belief in protecting the health of the woman becomes definite, therefore greatly enough to support state ruling of abortion under the strict scrutiny standard of judicial review; after the first trimester, which is the stage of pregnancy when abortion becomes dangerous to the mother carrying the child to term. The State’s concern in protecting the life of the unborn child becomes irresistible, after possibility, the stage of pregnancy when the unborn child is capable of independent life. Because neither interest is irresistible before the second trimester, the State may not regulate abortion in the first trimester either to reserve the woman’s health or to protect the life of the unborn child. After the first trimester the State may control the act of an abortion, but only for the purpose of protecting the woman’s health, not for the purpose of protecting the life of the unborn child. After viability, the State may regulate, and even forbid, abortion to protect the life of the unborn child, except when the act of abortion is needed to

wade. “Repeated challenges since 1973 narrowed the scope of Roe v. Wade but did not overturn it. In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992), the Supreme Court established that restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if they place an “undue burden” on a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus is viable” (). “Since the roe decision, anti abortion lawmakers have not been able to ban abortion outright. Instead, they have developed a very successful strategy of limiting a woman’s access to the procedure and restricting the procedures that physicians can use to perform it” (76). “The restrictions that were given made life harder for women. All of these laws are meant to dissuade a woman from going through with the abortion. Feminists oppose the restrictions. They view the laws as condescending to women, who they feel know how to make up their own minds about this personal, private decision” (77). “When they eventually make their way back to a clinic, they may be much farther along in the pregnancy, when the procedure becomes more invasive, potentially more dangerous to the mother, and much more expensive” (77). “For some clinics, the expenses brought on by TRAP laws are so high the facilities shut down. By the fall of 2014, only eight abortion clinics in Texas were still standing. Before the law, some 10,000 Texas women had to travel more than 200 miles

The Roe v. Wade case in 1973 was an extremely controversial and sensitive debate for most people, although it had a significant impact on women’s rights today. This case gave women the constitutional right and privacy in regards to making their own medical decisions with abortions. Before this case, the majority of states within the United States did not allow legal abortions to be carried out unless the mother’s life was in jeopardy. Within this paper, the background story of Roe v. Wade, ethical issues, the implications on current health care policies and laws, factors that prompted the United States Supreme court to make their decision, the consequences of this case, and the result of the 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the overturning of the Texas abortion restrictions will be further discussed.

The case surrounding the right to abortion began in 1969 when Norma McCorvey became pregnant. McCorvey, “who was opposed to having a child, traveled to Dallas, Texas, where she attempted to lie about her method conception in order to obtain an abortion”(Richards, Adams). Unfortunately, McCorvey’s attempts were futile when “her ruse was unveiled and the state refused to permit a legal abortion”(Richards, Adams). This denial prompted McCorvey to seek legal counsel to challenge the state of Texas on the basis that the statute “violated the Fourteenth Amendment mandating equal protection of the laws an the guarantee of personal liberty, an a mother’s right

Clearly, the legality of abortion, and of abortion restrictions, needs clarity. Should the state of North Dakota’s lawyers choose to take this case to the U.S. Supreme Court, as they have the option of doing (Denniston), I would recommend that the U.S. Supreme Court hear the case. As characterized by an earlier quote, state-level legislative and executive branches across the country have been playing a game with the case-based restrictions of Roe v. Wade. States have passed and implemented all sorts of statutory laws that test the boundaries of the prohibition on the prohibition of abortion.

In 1965, illegal abortions made up one-sixth of all pregnancy and childbirth related deaths. Now, it has become one of the safest medical procedures in the U.S.- with a safety record of over 99%. The U.S. Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) struck down a law that prohibited birth control. The Supreme Court held that the law violated the right to marital privacy. This case is important to feminism because it emphasizes privacy, control over one’s personal life, and freedom from government intrusion in relationships. Griswold v. Connecticut helped pave the way for Roe v. Wade. The case of Roe v. Wade began in 1970 when Norma McCorvey took federal action against the district attorney of Dallas, Texas, Henry Wade to ask: Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?

On June 27th, 2016 The Supreme Court threw out a Texas abortion access law in a victory to supporters of abortion rights, Supreme Court ruled 5-3 that Texas anti-abortion law is unconstitutional. “The Supreme Court ruled in favor of abortion rights in a major case challenging an anti-abortion law passed in Texas. The majority opinion, written by Justice Breyer, struck down the legislation mandating clinics have admitting privileges with local hospitals and requiring they meet the same standards as surgical centers. Breyer wrote "We conclude that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes,". He said that the restrictions placed "a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a provability abortion," amounted to an undue burden on abortion access," and were violations of the U.S. Constitution. He was joined by Justices Kennedy, Ruth Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. “The 5-3 decision was courts most far-reaching statement on abortion since planned Parenthood V. Casey in 1992, which reaffirmed the constitution right to abortion established in 1973 in Roe V. Wade (the right to safe and legal abortion) ”

The court also recognized that the right to privacy is not absolute and that a state has valid interests in protecting maternal health and protecting potential life. A state is allow to ban abortion after viability, except when it is necessary to protect a woman’s life or health. The ability to make this personal health care decision has also enabled women to pursue educational and employment opportunities that were often denied before the Roe case, The Supreme Court noted that “the ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives” (Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1992). According to the Economist, "Roe v. Wade may have liberated many women; yet it has also trapped America in an irresolvable clash of absolutes. On April 18, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court gave politicians the permission to interfere in the private health care decisions of women and families by creating the first federal law banning abortion procedures. The federal government made a decision to ban and criminalizes abortions in the second trimester of pregnancy . This ban affects more than just the women who need second-trimester abortions due to the fact that the Court's decision dismissed more than 30 years of precedent that prioritize women’s health when it came to laws that cast restriction on abortions. In the states that have passed laws similar to this, many women and their families were put into agonizing and tragic situations; being unable to end a pregnancy for serious medical reasons (Federal and State Bans and Restrictions on Abortion). As Politicians across the country succeed in restricting access to abortion, women are facing the consequences. Laws that restrict access to abortion hurt women's

The Abortion Control Act was heard in the Supreme Court in the Casey v. Planned Parenthood 1992 case. The justices at the