Summary Of Planned Parenthood Vs Casey Case

On July 15, 2008 a two year old girl named, Caylee Marie Anthony was reported missing from her Orlando Florida home. The call made by her grandmother to the authorities said that she had not seen Caylee for 31 days and that there was a foul smell in Caylee’s mother, Casey Anthony’s car similar to a dead body. She also reported that Casey stole the family’s car and money. There were several false statements given about the whereabouts of the child of which were eventually put to an end. The body of the child was found in a blanket and ruled a homicide due to the presence of duct tape. The trial lasted six weeks and the death penalty was asked for by the prosecution. Casey Anthony did not testify and the jury found Casey not guilty of first degree murder, aggravated child abuse, and aggravated manslaughter of a child but guilty of four misdemeanor counts of giving false information to the law enforcement. She was sentenced to four years in jail in which included time that she already served. She was also fined 1,000$ per count. She served three years and one day.

The ruling of Roe v. Wade included three key ideas. The first key idea was that women had the right to choose to have an abortion during the stage of pregnancy when the fetus had little chance of survival outside the womb and that women were able to obtain an abortion within unreasonable interferences from the state. The second idea confirmed a state’s power to restrict abortions when a fetus could live outside the womb, except in the case when the mother’s life was at risk. The final key idea that was decided in the ruling was that the state has interests in both the health of the women and the life of the fetus (Brannen and Hanes, 2001).

However, everything that was ruled by Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade case was contradicted, In1992, the Supreme court case “...Planned Parenthood V. Casey that said an abortion regulation was unconstitutional if it had 'the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.'” (Levy). This court ruled that the states had the right to restrict a woman's right to an abortion and prohibit public funding for the poor women that can not afford an abortion.

Regardless of the opinions surrounding abortion, a majority of people are familiar with the Supreme court cases of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. These two cases have played a tremendous role in regard to the abortion debate. In 1973, the Roe v. Wade case was ruled in favour of Roe and stated the stringent criminalization of abortion in Texas was deemed unconstitutional under the fourteenth amendment. The law violated the right of privacy, which implied the privacy of a woman’s decision to an abortion. Although the courts agreed with Roe, they also recognized the rights to an abortion are not absolute. Limitations to the right was based on the trimesters of pregnancy with the first trimester protecting the woman’s choice and the third trimester being acceptable for states to regulate or even ban abortions outside of therapeutic reasons.

Jane Roe, a pregnant mother wanting to abort her child sued in the interest of herself, and other women in comparable circumstances during a struggle to stop Texas from criminalizing all abortions except the ones that would save the life of a mother. Texas had made it a crime to receive an abortion except when the doctor advises the mother have an abortion for her own health and safety. Jane Roe wanted a ruling that declared these Texas’ statutes to be unconstitutional and also, she wanted to prevent the District Attorney from enforcing them. Roe alleged that she was pregnant and unmarried. She could not legally obtain an abortion by a licensed doctor because her life was not endangered. So, she argued that the law was unconstitutional and invaded upon her privacy rights that were protected by multiple amendments and laws. Claiming it invaded upon her privacy rights by not allowing her to abort her child.

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

• Spousal Notice – This provision did not hold up in court because the spousal notice was deemed unconstitutional in the case of Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) (Casebriefs, n.d., Pennsylvania General Assembly, 1982).

Planned parenthood V Casey: An abortion law required informed consent as well as a 24 hour waiting period prior to any abortion procedure in Pennsylvania. Any married woman had to state that her husband was in fact knowledgeable of this intention. Additionally, any minor seeking an abortion requires the consent of a parent. These laws were challenged by many clinics specializing in abortion, as well as many doctors. An appellate court upheld all of these stipulations with the exclusion of the married woman.

Not only has Planned Parenthood lied about the services that they provide, but a number of their own employees have filed lawsuits claiming that Planned Parenthood has cheated the system for their own profit. In 2011, Abby Johnson, the former director of the Planned Parenthood clinic in Bryan, Texas, filed a lawsuit claiming that her affiliate had purposefully sent in approximately $6 million in false claims to Medicaid (Sedlak 15). Similarly, in 2008 a former financial executive of Planned Parenthood in California, P. Victor Gonzalez, filed a lawsuit against Planned Parenthood for overcharging state and federal governments by at least $180 million for birth control pills (Sedlak 15). Planned Parenthood clinics in Texas are currently entangled in a lawsuit that “alleges its involvement in ‘repeated false, fraudulent, and ineligible claims for Medicaid reimbursements’ through the Texas

In 1973, Roe v. Wade ruled a state law that banned abortions, except in the cases of risking the life of the mother, unconstitutional (Garrow 833). The Court ruled that states were forbidden from regulating or outlawing abortion performed during the first trimester of a woman’s pregnancy, could pass abortion regulations if they were related to the health of the mother in the second and third trimesters, and pass abortion laws protecting the life of the fetus in the third trimester (Paltrow 18). However, the primary concern would remain to be the mother’s health, regardless. Roe v. Wade, controversial since it was decided, divided America and continues to spark debates,

In 1973, the Supreme Court made a decision in one of the most controversial cases in history, the case of Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1973)), in which abortion was legalized and state anti-abortion statues were struck down for being unconstitutional. This essay will provide a brief history and analysis of the issues of this case for both the woman’s rights and the states interest in the matter. Also, this essay will address the basis for the court ruling in Roe’s favor and the effects this decision has had on subsequent cases involving a woman’s right to choose abortion in the United States. The court’s decision created legal precedent for several subsequent abortion restriction cases and has led to the development of legislation to protect women’s health rights. Although the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade was a historic victory for women’s rights, it is still an extremely controversial subject today and continues to be challenged by various groups.

It was 19 years later when Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania V. Robert P. Casey, another abortion case, was brought to the Supreme Court. Prior to the Casey ruling, states had the power to regulate abortions only in the third trimester. Often times, states who opposed the ruling in Roe would create additional laws as to make it more difficult to get an abortion. One of these states, Pennsylvania, formed the Abortion Control Act, requiring “an “informed consent” provision requiring, at least 24 hours in advance, the physician performing the abortion to inform the pregnant woman of alternatives to abortion; the risks associated with the procedure; the estimated gestational age of the child at the time of the procedure; the possible availability of state economic assistance for prenatal care, childbirth and neonatal care.” Women also needed a ‘“spousal notification,” requiring women to give prior notice to their husbands. In Casey, the aspects pertaining to spousal notification of the Abortion Control Act were ruled as unlawful. Having the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a fetus that is not yet viable is an undue burden on the women. Restrictions can be placed on

In 1992, Roe v. Wade was upheld in Casey v. Planned Parenthood. However, the Supreme Court had become significantly more conservative in that time, and this ruling favored the states‘ rights to establish tighter abortion restrictions. In Pennsylvania, women were only permitted first trimester abortions if they had been given information about the fetus’s gestational state and the dangers of having the procedure. A married women was also required to inform her husband prior to having the abortion, and minors had to seek approval from at least one parent unless given a legal bypass. On top of these restrictions, there was also a mandatory 24-hour waiting period (McBride, “Casey v. Planned Parenthood”).

Abortion did not immediately engrave itself onto public agenda; it had help. The legal debate over the use of birth control proved to be the catalyst needed to propel abortion to the Supreme Court and into the ranks of public policy. The birth control movement was significant to Roe v. Wade because it served as a key in which to unlock the gates of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Courts decision to hear Griswold v. Connecticut, a case that challenged the Connecticut statute prohibiting anyone to “use any drug, article, or instrument to prevent conception or to give assistance or counsel in its use (p.39)”, is arguably the most significant factor in the Court’s

One of the most controversial situations in the United States is abortion. A couple of decades ago when abortion was illegal, thousands of woman died for attempting to terminate the child’s life themselves or with unprofessional help. On January 22, 1973, in the Roe v. Wade case, Supreme Court legalized abortion in all 50 states. This has saved thousands of woman’s lives and should remain legal.