Law Commons^™

Judges As Superheroes: The Danger Of Confusing Constitutional Decisions With Cosmic Battles, H. Jefferson Powell

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abortion Rights In The Supreme Court: A Tale Of Three Wedges, Jennifer S. Hendricks

ConLawNOW

In May 2021, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in a case designed to overrule Roe v. Wade. The assumption is that six justices are inclined to repudiate Roe, and that some of those six would like to go further, declaring a constitutional right to life that would prevent the abortion issue from going “back to the states” at all. The question for the next year is not whether Roe will be overruled—it already was, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey—but how far the Court will go. This essay describes the arc of the Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence in …

Unduly Burdening Abortion Jurisprudence, Mark Strasser

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The undue burden standard is the current test to determine whether abortion regulations pass constitutional muster. But the function, meaning, and application of that test have varied over time, which undercuts the test’s usefulness and the ability of legislatures to know which regulations pass constitutional muster. Even more confusing, the Court has refused to apply the test in light of its express terms, which cannot fail to yield surprising conclusions and undercut confidence in the Court. The Court must not only clarify what the test means and how it is to be used, but must also formulate that test so …

Third-Party Standing And Abortion Providers: The Hidden Dangers Of June Medical Services, Elika Nassirinia

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Standing is a long held, judicially-created doctrine intended to establish the proper role of courts by identifying who may bring a case in federal court. While standing usually requires that a party asserts his or her own rights, the Supreme Court has created certain exceptions that allow litigants to bring suit on behalf of third parties when they suffer a concrete injury, they have a “close relation” to the third party, and there are obstacles to the third party's ability to protect his or her own interests. June Medical Services, heard by the Supreme Court on June 29, 2020, …

Overruling Roe V. Wade: Lessons From The Death Penalty, Paul Benjamin Linton

Pepperdine Law Review

In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court struck down the Georgia and Texas death penalty statutes, thereby calling into question the validity of every other state death penalty statute. In their concurring opinions, Justices Brennan and Marshall expressed the view that, given society’s gradual abandonment of the death penalty, capital punishment violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” Justice Powell and three other justices dissented, arguing that the Court had misread the state of the law regarding society’s acceptance of the death penalty. Four years after Furman, in a quintet of cases, the Court held that …

The Scales Of Reproductive Justice: Casey’S Failure To Rebalance Liberty Interests In The Racially Disparate State Of Maternal Medicine, Mallori D. Thompson

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Despite the maternal medicine crisis in the U.S., especially for Black women, legislatures are challenging constitutional abortion doctrine and forcing women to interact with a system that may cost them their lives. This Article proposes that because of abysmal maternal mortality rates and the arbitrary nature of most abortion restrictions, the right to choose an abortion is embedded in our Fourteenth Amendment right to not be arbitrarily deprived of life by the State. This Article is a call to abortion advocates to begin submitting state maternal mortality data when challenging abortion restrictions. The call for attention to life was central …

Forget Pro-Life And Pro-Choice: Refocus Transvaginal Ultrasound Abortion Laws On Medicine, Casey Hughes

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

This Note reconciles the divide between the TV US debate and the original intent of abortion regulations to protect women’s health. By first analyzing the medicine and then applying it to the law, this Note proves transvaginal ultrasound regulations are not undue burdens on women’s access to abortion. Part I of this Note discusses transvaginal ultrasounds and their medical use in obstetrics, demonstrating they are not undue burdens, but rather beneficial to women and often necessary to support women’s health prior to abortions. Part II of this Note discusses abortion and ultrasound-related legal decisions and how they apply to …

Growing Burdens On Abortion Rights: An Individual Freedom During Covid-19 And Changing Judicial Interpretation, John Simpson

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

No abstract provided.

Covid-19, Abortion, And Public Health In The Culture Wars, Laura D. Hermer

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Policing The Wombs Of The World's Women: The Mexico City Policy, Samantha Lalisan

Indiana Law Journal

This Comment argues that the Policy should be repealed because it undermines

firmly held First Amendment values and would be considered unconstitutional if

applied to domestic nongovernmental organizations (DNGOs). It proceeds in four

parts. Part I describes the inception of the Policy and contextualizes it among other

antiabortion policies that resulted as a backlash to the U.S. Supreme Court’s

landmark decision in Roe v. Wade. Part II explains the Policy’s actual effect on

FNGOs, particularly focusing on organizations based in Nepal and Peru, and argues

that the Policy undermines democratic processes abroad and fails to achieve its stated

objective: reducing …

The Deliberative-Privacy Principle: Abortion, Free Speech, And Religious Freedom, B. Jessie Hill

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

If A Fetus Is A Person, It Should Get Child Support, Due Process, And Citizenship, Carliss N. Chatman

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This Article was originally published in The Washington Post on May 17, 2019. It has been edited and updated prior to its publication in the Washington and Lee Law Review.

Alabama has joined the growing number of states determined to overturn Roe v. Wade by banning abortion from conception forward. The Alabama Human Life Protection Act subjects a doctor who performs an abortion to as many as ninety-nine years in prison. The law has no exceptions for rape or incest. It redefines an “unborn child, child or person” as “[a] human being, specifically including an unborn child in utero …

Personhood: Law, Common Sense, And Humane Opportunities, Helen M. Alvaré

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

It is pointless to approach Professor Chatman’s argument on its own terms (to wit, “tak[ing] our laws seriously,” or equal application across myriad legal categories of “full personhood” rights) because these terms are neither seriously intended nor legally comprehensible. Instead, her essay is intended to create the impression that legally protecting unborn human lives against abortion opens up a Pandora’s box of legal complications so “ridiculous” and “far-fetched” that we should rather just leave things where they are under the federal Constitution post-Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. This impression, in turn, is a tool to …

Under Ten Eyes, Anthony Michael Kreis

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Carliss Chatman’s If a Fetus Is a Person, It Should Get Child Support, Due Process and Citizenship brilliantly captures the moment America is in, where abortion rights hang in the balance as state legislators, like those in Alabama, Georgia, Ohio, and elsewhere clamor to embrace fetal personhood. But, as Professor Chatman illustrates, legislators have expressed no interest in the full logical extent of this policy or the rights that should attach to a fetus if their measures ultimately become effective. The article incisively demonstrates how fetal personhood is singularly focused on ending abortion in the United States and is gaining …

Legalization Of Abortion Against Victims Of Rape Crimes Viewed From Victimology Perspective, Siska Elvandari

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

One of human rights guaranteed and protected in the 1945 Constitution is the right to live and maintain life, stated in Article 28 A of the 1945 Constitution. The right to live and maintain life is the highest right that is inherent in human beings as the subject of law since humans were born to death in the world. The right to live and maintain life is not only inherent in human beings who have been born, but also in humans or children who are still in the womb, stated in Article II of the Civil Code that "Children are …

Abortion In The United States: A Cry For Human Dignity, James J. Zumpano, Jr.

Intercultural Human Rights Law Review

In recent years, the debate surrounding abortion has taken flight. It has been one of the most discussed and most controversial topics in the history of the United States as well as around the world. This article undertakes a critical analysis of whether mothers in the United States should maintain their exclusive privacy right to choose to terminate a pregnancy or whether unborn babies also have substantive due process rights, in particular a right to life. The gestational process of human development as well as pregnancy from the mother's perspective shall first be addressed. The various types of abortion procedures, …

A Perfect Storm: Religion, Sex, And Administrative Law, Helen M. Alvare

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In order to propose a way forward toward better sexual and reproductive health regulation, which also avoids undercutting or crossing swords with religion, this Article will proceed as follows: Part I will paint with a broad brush the current state of sexual and reproductive health problems in the United States, focusing a bit upon younger Americans to whom SRA programs are addressed. It will highlight disparities according to race and socioeconomic conditions when these obtain. These are troubling on their face, but particularly troubling today at a time of perceived heightened racial and socioeconomic class tension in the United …

Panel 1: Abortion And Gay Rights

Georgia State University Law Review

Moderator: Eric Segall

Panelists: Jonathan Adler, Pam Karlan, and Mark Tushnet

Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Kelly Lynn Claxton

Ohio Northern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Challenging The Rhetorical Gag And Trap: Reproductive Capacities, Rights, And The Helms Amendment, Michele Goodwin

Northwestern University Law Review

This Essay argues that the battle over women’s autonomy, especially their reproductive healthcare and decision-making, has always been about much more than simply women’s health and safety. Rather, upholding patriarchy and dominion over women’s reproduction historically served political purposes and entrenched social and cultural norms that framed women’s capacities almost exclusively as service to a husband, mothering, reproducing, and sexual chattel. In turn, such social norms—often enforced by statutes and legal opinions—took root in rhetoric rather than the realities of women’s humanity, experiences, capacities, autonomy, and lived lives. As such, law created legal fictions about women and their supposed lack …

Personhood Under The Fourteenth Amendment, Vincent J. Samar

Marquette Law Review

This Article examines recent claims that the fetus be afforded the status of a person under the Fourteenth Amendment. It shows that such claims do not carry the necessary objectivity to operate reasonably in a pluralistic society. It then goes on to afford what a better view of personhood that could so operate might actually look like. Along the way, this Article takes seriously the real deep concerns many have for the sanctity of human life. By the end, it attempts to find a balance for those concerns with the view of personhood offered that should engage current debates about …

The Impact Of Justice Scalia's Replacement On Gender Equality Issues, Wilson R. Huhn

ConLawNOW

The last forty-six years may be accurately described as the era of the modern Republican Supreme Court. As a result of presidential elections, Republican presidents have nominated all ten of the Justices appointed to the United States Supreme Court between 1969 and 1991. Republicans have thus controlled the Court since 1970. During this period the right to gender equality was recognized and the right to marriage equality was realized. However, also during this period many Republican Justices staunchly opposed gender equality, and far more remains to be accomplished.

Since Justice Scalia’s death, the Supreme Court has been deadlocked on a …

Unduly Burdening Women’S Health: How Lower Courts Are Undermining Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Leah M. Litman

Michigan Law Review Online

At the end of the Supreme Court’s 2016 Term, the Court issued its decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. One of the more closely watched cases of that Term, Hellerstedt asked whether the Supreme Court would adhere to its prior decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed that women have a constitutionally protected right to decide to end a pregnancy.

The state of Texas had not formally requested that the Court revisit Casey or the earlier decision Casey had affirmed, Roe v. Wade, in Hellerstedt. But that was what Texas was, in effect, asking …

Returning To Roe: The Renewed Promise Of Whole Woman's Health, Cristina Salcedo

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Roe V. Wade: The Case That Changed Democracy, Adam Lamparello, Cynthia Swann

Tennessee Journal of Race, Gender, & Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Think Of The Children: Using Iied To Reformulate Disturbing Speech Restrictions, Richard Lorren Jolly

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Colorado State Court of Appeals recently upheld an injunction restricting public displays of aborted fetuses. The court held that the restriction passed strict scrutiny because the state had a compelling interest in protecting children from the psychological harm of “disturbing images” and the injunction was narrowly tailored. This marked the first time an injunction had been upheld on this rationale. This Note critiques that holding and others. It contends that while some federal and state courts have recognized the interest in protecting the psychological wellbeing of children from disturbing speech as compelling, the interest is not supported by precedent. …

The Unconstitutionality Of Ohio's House Bill 125: The Heartbeat Bill As Analyzed Under The First Amendment Of The United States Constitution, Jessica L. Knopp

ConLawNOW

This article examines the constitutionality of Ohio’s controversial House Bill 125 (“H.B. 125”), which includes new restrictions and requirements for abortion procedures performed in Ohio. The author argues that, while the new abortion measures conflict with the Supreme Court’s Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence established in Roe v. Wade and in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, H.B. 125 also violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by imputing religious beliefs about conception and the value of life onto all Ohioans.

The article first outlines the current legal framework for constitutionally acceptable and unacceptable abortion restrictions, including a discussion of informed consent …

Constitutionalizing Fetal Rights: A Salutary Tale From Ireland, Fiona De Londras

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

In 1983, Ireland became the first country in the world to constitutionalize fetal rights. The 8th Amendment to the Constitution, passed by a referendum of the People, resulted in constitutional protection for “the right to life of the unborn,” which was deemed “equal” to the right to life of the “mother.” Since then, enshrining fetal rights in constitutions and in legislation has emerged as a key part of anti-abortion campaigning. This Article traces the constitutionalization of fetal rights in Ireland and its implications for law, politics, and women. In so doing, it provides a salutary tale of such an approach. …

Not In My Hospital: The Future Of State Statutes Requiring Abortion Providers To Maintain Admitting Privileges At Local Hospitals, Daniel J. Glass

Akron Law Review

In recent years, state legislatures have enacted a variety of restrictive statutes making it more difficult for abortion providers to serve their patients, typically in the name of health and safety. Those opposing these restrictive statutes commonly refer to them as Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws. This Note discusses admitting privileges statutes, which require that abortion providers maintain permissions with a local hospital to admit and treat their patients. Admitting privileges statutes have been challenged in federal courts, but the resulting decisions have been inconsistent. This Note compares the analysis used by federal circuits and district courts in …

Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft

Akron Law Review

TWO MISSOURI-LICENSED physicians and Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri, a nonprofit corporation, originally brought this suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri to challenge the constitutionality of the Missouri abortion statute' (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Striking as "overbroad" only that portion of the Act which would have required physicians to attempt to save an aborted fetus' life at any stage of pregnancy, the district court upheld the sections of the statute which required that during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a married woman seeking an abortion must have the consent of her spouse,' …