Constitutional Law Commons^™

Privatizing Bars On Abortion: Eviscerating Constitutional Rights Through Tort Remedies, Maya Manian

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

State governments have devised a new means to evade the Constitution. Their new means is to enact tort statutes that, in effect, ban constitutionally protected conduct. In particular, some states have made the provision of an abortion a tort for which there can be no defense and no cap on the amount of liability. These states have made performing an abortion essentially illegal. Yet, because tort statutes are enforced through private litigation, rather than public prosecution, a number of courts have held that they lack jurisdiction to review these laws. Federal courts have concluded that standing doctrine and state sovereign …

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.

Rethinking Judicial Minimalism: Abortion Politics, Party Polarization, And The Consequences Of Returning The Constitution To Elected Government, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Marriage, Abortion, And Coming Out, Scott Skinner-Thompson, Sylvia A. Law, Hugh Baran

Publications

Over the past two decades, legal protections for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals have dramatically expanded. Simultaneously, meaningful access to reproductive choice for women has eroded. What accounts for the different trajectories of LGBTQ rights and reproductive rights?

This Piece argues that one explanation—or at least partial explanation—for the advance of LGBTQ rights relative to reproductive rights is the differing degree to which individuals have come out about their experiences with sexuality compared to coming out about experiences with unplanned pregnancies. In particular, as catalogued in this Piece, popular media portrayals of lesbian and gay individuals have proliferated, broadening the …

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. …

Twenty-Week Abortion Statutes: Four Arguments, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court has never justified the conclusion that the Constitution bars any substantial regulation designed to protect fetal life prior to viability. No majority opinion has ever offered a rationale for the viability rule, and the arguments recited in non-majority opinions are either conclusory or fail to distinguish viability from earlier lines that might be drawn. The most coherent academic attempt to justify the rule — Professor Laurence Tribe’s argument that a woman can “transfer nurture of [a viable] fetus to other hands” — rests on the erroneous assumption that a pregnant woman can arrange for premature delivery of …

The Future Of Abortion Law In The United States, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

In 1971, Judith Jarvis Thomson published what was then and still often is regarded as a trailblazing philosophical defense of a woman’s right to have a lawful abortion. It is time to revisit Thomson’s paper. The aim here is not to engage Thomson’s pro-choice conclusions, which are indeed mistaken, but to show that her question—to what extent can abortion be morally justified, assuming that it is the deliberate killing of one person by his or her mother—is the question today in American law concerning abortion. Pro-life people and groups argue among themselves about the prudence of political efforts to roll …

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,' …

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,2 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,' …

Abortion; Parental Consent; Minors' Rights To Due Process, Equal Protection And Privacy; State V. Koome, Barbara Child

Akron Law Review

The Washington court had before it a physician appealing his conviction for performing an abortion on an unmarried 16-year-old woman, a ward of the King County Juvenile Court, which had given its consent to the abortion. However, the young woman's parents and the Catholic Children's Services, her temporary guardian, both opposed the abortion and were granted a stay of the abortion order pending review by the state supreme court. During the stay, Dr. Koome performed the abortion. The supreme court held that the Washington consent statute "too broadly encumbers the right of unmarried minor women to choose to terminate pregnancy, …

State Funding Of Nontherapeutic Abortions; Medicaid Plans; Equal Protection; Right To Choose An Abortion; Beal V. Doe, Maher V. Roe, Poelker V. Doe, Constance Leistiko

Akron Law Review

In Beal v. Doe the United States Supreme Court held that Title XIX of the Social Security Act permits but does not require states participating in the Medicaid program established by that Act to fund nontherapeutic abortions. In the companion cases of Maher v. Roe and Poelker v. Doe, the same majority held in Maher that the Equal Protection Clause does not require a state that funds childbirth and therapeutic abortions to also fund the costs of nontherapeutic abortions, and in Poelker, that the Constitution does not prohibit a state or city from forbidding the performance of elective …

Does The Right To Elective Abortion Include The Right To Ensure The Death Of, Stephen G. Gilles

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Primer On Hobby Lobby: For-Profit Corporate Entities’ Challenge To The Hhs Mandate, Free Exercise Rights, Rfra’S Scope, And The Nondelegation Doctrine, Terri R. Day, Leticia M. Diaz, Danielle Weatherby

Pepperdine Law Review

Earlier this term, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the consolidated case of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, the first of a litany of cases in which for-profit business entities are invoking the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA") in support of their claim that the Affordable Care Act’s HHS Mandate violates their freedom of religion. In particular, these plaintiffs argue that the Mandate’s requirement that employer-provided health insurance covers the costs of contraceptives, the "morning after" pill, and other fertility-related drugs conflicts with their deeply-held religious belief that life begins at conception and is, therefore, unconstitutional. …

Testing Sex, Rachel Rebouché

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Falling Into The Trap: The Ineffectiveness Of ‘Undue Burden’ Analysis In Protecting Women’S Right To Choose, Laura Young

Pace Law Review

This Comment will first examine existing Supreme Court abortion and reproductive autonomy jurisprudence before seguing into an exploration of the limits of the ‘undue burden’ analysis through the Jackson Women’s Health Organization v. Currier temporary and preliminary injunction decisions. The final section of this Comment explores potential solutions from other areas of constitutional law, and proposes that some techniques for limiting the reach of state regulatory power might be imported from environmental law, which frequently must deal with interactions amongst complex regulatory regimes.

The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abortion And The Constitutional Right (Not) To Procreate, Mary Ziegler

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Overcoming Barriers To The Protection Of Viable Fetuses, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

I start this Article from the premise that the Court was correct in Roe v. Wade concerning the significance of fetal viability. I assume for the sake of argument that viability is a momentous point in pregnancy and that “logical and biological justifications” support a compelling state interest in protecting the lives of fetuses that have crossed the viability threshold. The goal of this Article is to highlight factors that individually and in concert significantly hinder legislative attempts to preserve the lives of viable fetuses, and to identify measures that, if permitted by the courts, could facilitate the pursuit of …

The Medical Assumption At The Foundation Of Roe V. Wade And Its Implications For Women's Health, Clarke Forsythe

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Roe V. Wade Was Written, David J. Garrow

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Backlash: Legal History, Polarization, And Roe V. Wade, Mary Ziegler

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Re-Reading Roe V. Wade, Richard S. Myers

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abortion Exceptionalism And Undue Burden Preemption, Caitlin E. Borgmann

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Roe, Casey, And Sex-Selection Abortion Bans, Thomas J. Molony

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

If The Purpose Fits: The Two Functions Of Casey'S Purpose Inquiry, Priscilla J. Smith

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Previability Abortion And The Pain Of The Unborn, Teresa S. Collett

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.