Constitutional Law Commons^™

Abortion (Re)Federalization, Gerald S. Dickinson

Utah Law Review

 This Article examines how the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision has opened an unconventional pathway for the development of a new form of “bottom-up constitutionalism” that could reshape federal abortion rights in the future. Traditionally, federal constitutional law has exerted a dominant influence over state laws and state court jurisprudence. The uniformity in abortion protections nationwide for decades was a product of the Roe v. Wade era of federal supremacy. However, Dobbs reversed this dynamic by dramatically curtailing federal constitutional authority over abortion, thereby leaving states as primary rights regulators. This Article focuses on the …

Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, Inc. V. State Ex Rel. Office Of The Nevada Attorney General (Civil), 142 Nev. Adv. Op. 40 (May 28, 2026), Charnel Gibson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Nevada’s parental notification abortion statute is likely unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide physicians with adequate notice of the conduct required and permits arbitrary enforcement.

Bodies At Risk When Choice Is A Privilege: Women’S Reproductive Healthcare Accessibility And Health Outcomes Since The Dobbs (2022) Ruling, Dallas Bonnet

Undergraduate Theses

Existing literature has well-documented the disproportionate effects of abortion restrictions upon socioeconomically disadvantaged women and women of color. This thesis builds on that work by exploring the relationship between state-level abortion restrictions and women’s self-reported health, as well as state-level infant mortality rates and maternal mortality rates. This project breaks these relationships down into three separate studies: Study 1 investigates the effect that abortion restrictions have on women’s self perceptions of health. Study 2 assesses the impact of abortion restrictions on infant mortality rates. Study 3 inspects the impact of abortion restrictions on maternal mortality rates. The primary independent variable …

The Comstock Act: Will The First Amendment Finally Bury This Zombie Law’S Speech Restrictions?, Morgan Garces

University of Miami Law Review

The Comstock Act of 1873 is a federal anti-obscenity law that, along with lascivious and filthy literature, explicitly restricts the sending of anything that can be used to procure an abortion—including writing. However, since the decision of Roe v. Wade, the law’s abortion-speech provisions had been considered long-dead—although never officially being overturned. Now that Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has rescinded the right to an abortion, the law appears to be reaching out from its grave. Anti-abortion activists are currently looking to the Comstock Act as a federal abortion ban already on the books because of its ban …

This Land Is Our Land: Creating Abortion Safe-Havens In Federal Enclaves Using The Nondelegation Doctrine, Callie Fucarino

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

In a post-Dobbs world, the legal status of abortion care is in the hands of the states. Healthcare providers and people seeking abortion care must either take legal risks or betray their morals and oath to care for their patients to follow the law in certain restrictive states. What remains in flux is the status of abortion rights on federal lands. There is currently no federal law that criminalizes abortion, but many states prohibit it. Within some states that have restricted abortion, there lie federal enclaves—certain specified land that the United States government owns, where federal law controls. At first …

Why Dobbs Is No Roadmap For Deciding State Constitutional Abortion Issues, Daniel A. Small

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

In deciding that Fourteenth Amendment “liberty” does not protect a woman’s decision to end her pregnancy, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization sought to distinguish the precedent that Roe and Casey relied on to recognize an abortion right. The Dobbs majority claimed that this precedent did not support a right to abortion because, in its view, destroying a fetus is more immoral than the conduct at issue in those earlier cases. However, moral concerns about fetal destruction shed no light on the nature or characteristics of a woman’s liberty interest in an abortion decision. These concerns, therefore, cannot show whether …

The Equal Rights Amendment: The 28th Amendment To The U.S. Constitution, Twiss Butler, Patrick Butler

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

This article reviews how Supreme Court interpretations of the 14^th Amendment have allowed laws to discriminate against women. It aims to show that the Equal Rights Amendment, ratified as the 28^th Amendment in 2020, offers a constitutional basis for eliminating all forms of legal sex discrimination against women. These forms include discrimination based on pregnancy and abortion, commodifying women’s bodies, and allowing men to intrude into women’s protected spaces. The review starts with the denial of protection for women by America’s Declaration of Independence in 1776, denounces the Supreme Court’s precedent-setting 1974 Geduldig decision, which ruled—quite illogically—that discrimination …

A Reflective Case Study Of Leadership Models In The Fight For Abortion Access, Jamie R. Abrams

ConLawNOW

This Essay presents a reflective case study on divergent leadership models in the fight for abortion access. Just as scholars study what is happening regarding abortion access, it is equally important to study how people advocate for supportive laws and policies, where they advocate, and who they center in the advocacy, so that tactics remain effective in a rapidly evolving legal, political, and social landscape. This Essay analyzes the “I Stand with Planned Parenthood” advocacy campaign of the 2000s as an example of a centralized and individual leadership model, and it identifies strategic strengths and weaknesses of that approach. This …

It's Not About Children: How Gender Resentment Shapes Public Opinion On Abortion In The United States, Nicole Kalaf-Hughes, Debra Leiter

ConLawNOW

The debate around women’s reproductive health care, and particularly restrictions on abortion, remains a hotly contested area of American politics. Increasingly, restrictions on abortion access have become politically salient and increasingly common. While traditional justification from anti-abortion forces often rests on arguments about the reverence for life, increasingly we have seen an emphasis on the argument that anti-abortion policy protect women and children. Yet if those preferences truly drive abortion attitudes, then the same attitudes that predict abortion restrictions should also predict preferences for policies that materially support women and children. However, if instead attitudes towards women’s place in society …

Personhood After Dobbs, Joshua J. Craddock

Catholic University Law Review

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, unsettled questions remain about the constitutional status of unborn children. With good reason, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization did not address whether unborn children are persons within the original meaning of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. The historical evidence, however, is now well-established that when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, the word “person” had a settled public meaning that included every human being—children in the womb among them. And if unborn human beings were included within the original public meaning of “person” in …

Let's Get Personal: Due Process And Personal Jurisdiction As A New Path Forward For Extraterritoriality, Samy Abdelsalam

Northwestern University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has put fundamental principles of federalism and state sovereignty under attack. Legislation and lawsuits in states nationwide aim to limit the rights of American citizens to travel freely between states in search of medical care. Further, these measures have extraterritorial reach, legally entangling the rights of private citizens in other states who provide medical care even while fully within their own state borders. Scholars have analyzed this development through various doctrinal lenses, including the Dormant Commerce Clause. But these frameworks fail to adequately protect those who are unfortunate enough …

Project 2025 And Due Process After Dobbs, Tracy Turner

ConLawNOW

Project 2025 supporters have been appointed to prominent federal offices in the second Trump Administration. This includes, most notably, the Office of Management and Budget, for a key strategy of implementing the Project’s goals is manipulation of federal funding. This Essay explores what this might mean for women’s rights and suggests a legal theory with which to challenge Project initiatives. Project 2025 repackages a platform that is fully anti-feminist. It is not a new platform. It is the same set of tools that has been used against feminism since the movement’s inception. It expansively seeks policy changes for abortion, contraception, …

Prenatal Personhood, State Duties, And Congress’S Abortion Power Under The Fourteenth Amendment, David R. Upham

Catholic University Law Review

Many antiabortion jurists have contended that by its original meaning, the Fourteenth Amendment not only (1) recognizes the personhood of prenatal human beings, but also (2) requires states to have and enforce the antiabortion laws necessary to the equal protection of these prenatal persons, and even (3) empowers Congress to pass remedial antiabortion laws where the state fail to protect such persons.

In this essay, I will contend that the Amendment does indeed recognize the personhood of prenatal human beings, but largely leaves with the states the authority to determine the scope of the protection to be afforded such persons. …

Maine Abortion Statues Of 1979: Testing The Constitutional Limits, Arlyn H. Weeks

Maine Law Review

In June of 1979 the 109th Maine Legislature enacted four statutes dealing with abortion. The public and legislative debate on these issues was intense and emotional. Due to the great scope of the subject, this Comment will be limited to discussion of the statutes dealing with informed consent and parental notification, which directly raise issues of individual constitutional rights. The constitutional implications of these two statutes will be examined, and the likely outcome of a constitutional challenge to each will be suggested. Because there are as yet no Supreme Court decisions directly on point for either statute as written, this …

Disabled And Disenfranchised: The Fight For Reproductive Freedom And Democracy Post-Dobbs, Robyn M. Powell

Cardozo Law Review

The Supreme Court has thrust abortion onto ballots nationwide, transforming fundamental rights into political battlegrounds. In the aftermath of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, people with disabilities face a perfect storm of eroded reproductive freedoms and persistent barriers to democratic participation. This Article exposes the hollow promise of the Court's purported deference to "the people's elected representatives," revealing instead a landscape where those most affected by abortion restrictions struggle to have their voices heard. The Court's invocation of democracy is arguably disingenuous, serving more as a rhetorical device than agenuine commitment to democratic principles. Nevertheless, engaging with this …

Dobbs And The New Doctrine Of Stare Decisis, Russell A. Miller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Alongside the historic and troubling annulment of the half-century-old Substantive Due Process right to abortion, Dobbs produced another significant outcome. To get its substantive constitutional law result, the Court’s majority also had to reconceive—and significantly weaken—the doctrine of stare decisis. This was necessary because, following Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the constitutional right to abortion largely depended on respect for precedent as the basis for its survival. To overturn Roe, the Dobbs majority had to blast through the established practice of precedent and articulate a new doctrine of stare decisis. It seems that precedent …

Abortion Ally Or Abettor: Accomplice And Conspiracy Liability After Dobbs, Mary Fan

Articles

The bristle of state laws criminalizing abortion after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization raises important questions about accomplice and conspiracy liability for helping people pursue reproductive freedoms out of state. Abortion funds, grassroots organizations, pilots, and other humanitarian volunteers are vital for people in need of abortions, who often are trapped by a lack of resources in abortion criminalization jurisdictions. Threats of prosecution are chilling and even shutting down assistance by abortion funds for travel to pursue reproductive freedoms. The liability questions after Dobbs arise against a backdrop of increasing prosecutions in Europe and the United States for crimes …

Dobbs V. Brown, Benjamin H. Barton

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization1is the most important and impactful Supreme Court decision since at least Roe v. Wade, and potentially since Brown v. Board of Education. Past survey data show that most Americans can only name two Supreme Court opinions: Roe and Brown. Dobbs will surely join that list. This Article compares the history, drafting, and opinions of Dobbs and Brown to show what a missed opportunity Dobbs represents. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the opinion, it should be clear that Dobbs was one of those unique times (like that of Brown) where the Court …

Moral Politics Theory Applied To Abortion: Utopias, Dystopias, And Dobbs, Susan Ayres

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines Moral Politics Theory (MPT) as a way to understand current tensions in the US concerning reproductive justice. MPT, as developed and researched for over thirty years by cognitive scientist, George Lakoff, provides a way to explain differences in political worldviews. According to Lakoff’s research in Moral Politics and Don’t Think of an Elephant!, conservatives tend to hold a strict-father model, and progressives hold a nurturant-parent model. People in the political middle tend to endorse both models; Lakoff labels those in the middle as “biconceptuals,” and discusses how this group is most susceptible to persuasion because metaphors frame …

Viability As Abortion-Rights Orthodoxy, Susan Frelich Appleton

Scholarship@WashULaw

Borrowing a quotation from Justice Jackson’s influential opinion in West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, Professors Linda McClain and James Fleming have named their ambitious and illuminating new book “What Shall Be Orthodox” in Polarized Times. As Justice Jackson wrote in applying the First Amendment to protect school children with familial objections to a required flag salute: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act …

We Have Lost Our Minds: Bioethics After Dobbs, Teneille R. Brown

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the paradoxical treatment of autonomy in American healthcare law. While autonomy has become the dominant principle in medical ethics and neoliberal market philosophies, pregnant people have been systematically denied this same autonomy through increasingly restrictive abortion statutes. Using the rhetoric of “informed consent,” abortion-restrictive statutes ironically pervert the animating principles behind the doctrine—rendering it almost meaningless.  I argue that this contradiction stems from the dehumanization of pregnant people who seek abortions, particularly through the denial of their capacity to have individual, complex mental states and feelings. Drawing on moral psychology, the article demonstrates how pregnant people are …

Fighting For Abortion Access In Canada: A Constitutional Analysis, Jordana Borzellino

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

Access to abortion is a controversial matter that creates a labyrinth of polarizing issues. Perspectives on abortion range from anathema to overzealous support, with stakeholders occasionally resorting to legal avenues to control access one way or another. This paper will explore the possibility of protecting and expanding access to abortion through constitutional mechanisms in the Canadian legal landscape. By analyzing Canada's current degree of access, this paper will explain that abortion services for those in need are inadequate. In order to advocate for greater access, this paper examines a multitude of legal tools and doctrines to constitutionally protect access to …

Privacy Law’S Role In An Information Economy, Sari Mazzurco

Cardozo Law Review

What do we lose when we lose our privacy? A slew of recently enacted state laws suggest that the loss of privacy is merely a loss of individual choice in the market exchange of services for personal information. This Article argues that a loss of privacy risks something greater: the collapse of complex and fluid social identity. Without privacy, individuals cannot nurture their own senses of self because they are no longer free to try on different social roles across diverse relationships. Pervasive, private data collection threatens multifaceted selfhood by eliminating the boundaries that make social roles distinct and hindering …

Decoding Dobbs: A Typology To Better Understand The Roberts Court's Jurisprudence, Katie Yoder

Honors Projects

The U.S. Supreme Court first recognized Substantive Due Process (“SDP”) in the early twentieth century. In Lochner v. New York, the Court established that there are certain unenumerated rights that are implied by the Fourteenth Amendment.Though SDP originated in a case about worker’s rights and liberties, it quickly became relevant to many cases surrounding personal intimate decisions involving health, safety, marriage, sexual activity, and reproduction.Over the past 60 years, the Court relied upon SDP to justify expanding a fundamental right to privacy, liberty, and the right to medical decision making. Specifically, the court applied these concepts to allow for freedoms …

The Rise, Fall, And Rise Of Cyber Civil Libertarianism, Hannah Bloch-Wehba

Faculty Scholarship

Using sexual speech as its focal point, this essay explores the ambiguous legacy of cyber civil liberties and the ascent of alternative paradigms for digital freedom. From its inception, cyberlaw was characterized by a moral panic over sexual speech, pornography, and the protection of children familiar to First Amendment scholars. Important civil libertarian victories recognized that sexual speech and pornography were constitutionally protected from state intervention. The civil libertarian paradigm saw government regulation as the primary threat to free speech online, the marketplace as the more appropriate mechanism for regulating expression, and courts as the rightful arbiters of these disputes. …

The Post-Dobbs Reality: Privacy Expectations For Period-Tracking Apps In Criminal Abortion Prosecutions, Sophie L. Nelson

Pepperdine Law Review

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 was met with waves of both support and criticism throughout the United States. Several states immediately implemented or began drafting trigger laws that criminalize seeking and providing an abortion. These laws prompted several period-tracking app companies to encrypt their users’ data to make it more difficult for the government to access period- and pregnancy-related information for criminal investigations. This Comment explores whether the Fourth Amendment and U.S. privacy statutes protect users of period-tracking apps from government surveillance. More specifically, this Comment argues that …

Symposium: Gender, Health & The Constitution: On The Constitutional Requirement For Adequate Prenatal Care Post-Dobbs, Ainslee Johnson-Brown

ConLawNOW

This Essay argues that state abortion statutes codifying government interests in the health and welfare of the unborn trigger a constitutional right to prenatal care where adequate medical care is constitutionally required in the penal system. It explores the healthcare mandates required by the U.S. Constitution in the era before the passage of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs, specifically looking at abortion access and prenatal provisions in the penological system. It then dissects abortion-related legislation passed by various states in the wake of Dobbs—emphasizing language within the legislative findings that could trigger a constitutional obligation for prenatal …

Cherry-Picking History: Witchcraft, The Common Law, And The Weaponization Of Substantive Due Process, Sarah E. Bradley

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

In 2021, the Supreme Court sharply altered its substantive due process analysis in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, reversing the 49-year-old decision in Roe v. Wade to establish abortion access as a constitutional right. The Court reframed its substantive due process analysis as a two-step test, requiring a right to be narrowly framed and “deeply rooted in history and tradition” before it could be analyzed as “implicit in the concept of liberty,” instead of its previous balancing test that involved a broad description of the right. In the Dobbs majority opinion, the Court cherry-picked elements of common law …

“I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free”: A Lamentation On Dobbs V. Jackson’S Pernicious Impact On The Lives And Liberty Of Women, April L. Cherry

Cleveland State Law Review

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned nearly fifty years of precedent when it declared in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that abortion was not a fundamental right, and therefore it was not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment and substantive due process. In law school corridors and legal scholar circles, discussion of the Court’s evisceration of abortion rights focused on the corresponding changes in Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence and the Court’s outright dismissal of stare decisis. But in homes, hospitals, community centers, and workplaces, different conversations were happening. Conversations, mostly had by women, concerned the real-life consequences of overturning …

Charging Abortion, Milan Markovic

Faculty Scholarship

As long as Roe v. Wade remained good law, prosecutors could largely avoid the question of abortion. The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has now placed prosecutors at the forefront of the abortion wars. Some chief prosecutors in antiabortion states have pledged to not enforce antiabortion laws, whereas others are targeting even out-of-state providers. This post-Dobbs reality, wherein the ability to obtain an abortion depends not only on the politics of one’s state but also the policies of one’s local district attorney, has received minimal scrutiny from legal scholars.

Prosecutors have broad charging discretion, …