Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Irrational Women: Informed Consent And Abortion Regret, Maya Manian
Irrational Women: Informed Consent And Abortion Regret, Maya Manian
Maya Manian
This chapter explores the law’s failure in the twenty-first century to treat pregnant women as capable of making their own decisions concerning whether to have an abortion. The Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Gonzales v. Carhart, which upheld a federal ban on a type of second-trimester abortion that many physicians believe is safest for their patients, brought the question of women’s capacity for abortion decision-making to the forefront of public legal consciousness. In Carhart, the Court abandoned its previous deference and respect for a woman’s right to be her own decision-maker with regard to abortion and instead determined that a …
Rights, Remedies And Facial Challenges, Maya Manian
Rights, Remedies And Facial Challenges, Maya Manian
Maya Manian
This brief comment extends upon a key point raised by Caitlin Borgmann’s article, Holding Legislatures Constitutionally Accountable Through Facial Challenges, which argues in part that the Roberts Court takes an outcome-driven approach to facial challenges. Building on Borgmann’s analysis, this comment further suggests that the Court not only manipulates the law in an outcome determinative manner, but also exploits the rules regarding the use of as-applied and facial challenges as a means to rewrite substantive law without having to openly overrule prior precedent. This comment focuses on Gonzales v. Carhart as an illustration of the Roberts Courts’ manipulation of procedural …
The Irrational Woman: Informed Consent And Abortion Decision-Making, Maya Manian
The Irrational Woman: Informed Consent And Abortion Decision-Making, Maya Manian
Maya Manian
In Gonzales v. Carhart, the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on a type of second-trimester abortion that many physicians believe is safer for their patients. Carhart presented a watershed moment in abortion law, because it marks the Supreme Court’s first use of the anti-abortion movement’s “woman-protective” rationale to uphold a ban on abortion and the first time since Roe v. Wade that the Court denied women a health exception to an abortion restriction. The woman-protective rationale asserts that banning abortion promotes women’s mental health. According to Carhart, the State should make the final decisions about pregnant women’s healthcare, because …