Constitutional Law Commons^™

Dobbs, Right-Wing Revisionism, And Public Outrage: Rodrigo's Late-Night Chronicle, Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic

American University Law Review

When we next see Rodrigo, he has been brought into town by Giannina’s women’s rights group. The Supreme Court had just decided Dobbs and revoked a constitutional right that had existed for fifty years prior. Giannina’s organization is meeting to discuss possible responses to the Dobbs decision. While he is in town, Rodrigo decides to seek out the professor, hoping to reconnect and pick his brain on this seismic shift in the legal landscape.

Deeply Rooted Or Deeply Flawed? A Constitutional Criticism Of Dobbs And Roe's Potential Resurrection, Julian Whitley

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Abortion has been a divisive issue in this country for decades. Some believe that abortion should be illegal under any circumstance, others believe that abortion under certain circumstances should be legal, and still others believe that abortion should be legal in all circumstances. The issue of abortion was initially decided by the Court in 1973 under Roe v. Wade, where the Court devised a trimester approach.

Confidentiality Over Privacy, Stacey A. Tovino

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Buck As (Anti) Canon: The Misuse Of Eugenics Rhetoric In Selective-Abortion Jurisprudence And The Dangers For Tort Law, Samantha C. Smith

American University Law Review

America’s notorious eugenics case Buck v. Bell is being resurrected as anticanon in abortion jurisprudence. Buck became one of the Court’s worst decisions by upholding eugenic practices, but these recent anticanonical citations also prove harmful by misidentifying eugenics. This Article joins critics of this misuse of “eugenics” labeling and warns that the rhetorical use of Buck in abortion cases has dangerous implications for reproductive medicine. It draws on Buck as the leading precedent for eugenics under the law and demonstrates that selective-abortion cases are distinguishable because of two failures of the Buck Court: the failure to recognize state interference with …

Abortion Localism And Preemption In A Post-Roe Era, Kaitlin Ainsworth Caruso

Lewis & Clark Law Review

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated federal constitutional protections for abortion. Practically, a person’s access to abortion has long depended on where they live and where they can travel; that disparity is far worse now. In light of Dobbs, some states decisively changed their laws, often decimating abortion access. In other states, however, the law remains unclear; advocates are furiously lobbying and litigating to redefine their states’ standards. Amid this upheaval, one element of the new abortion landscape is underappreciated: how localities impact abortion access.

For decades, local governments have influenced access to abortion …

Abortion Rights As (Inter)National Human Rights: Dobbs And The Noncompliance Of U.S. Abortion Policies Under International Human Rights Law, Sydney Chong Ju Padgett

Lewis & Clark Law Review

The current state of reproductive rights in the United States following Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization constitutes yet another chapter in the saga of the United States’ hypocrisy in failing to uphold international human rights at the domestic level. International human rights law unequivocally provides that safe and legal abortion access is a fundamental human right. Yet, applying treaty body guidance to the cruel and irrational legislation enacted in Dobbs’ wake, it is clear: the United States has wholly and dangerously failed to comply with its international commitments to protect and uphold the fundamental rights at stake in regulating …

Dobbs, Democracy, And Dysfunction, David Landau, Rosalind Dixon

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Thinly Rooted: Dobbs, Tradition, And Reproductive Justice, Darren L. Hutchinson

Faculty Articles

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. These two cases held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment encompassed a right of women to terminate a pregnancy. Roe reflected over 60 years of substantive due process precedent finding and reaffirming a constitutional right of privacy with several animating themes, including bodily integrity, equality, and dignity. The Court’s substantive due process doctrine had established that the analysis in such cases would involve multiple points of inquiry, such as tradition, contemporary practices, and …

How To Survive The Culture Wars: Conflict Of Laws Post-Dobbs, Roger Michalski

Faculty Articles

Abortion is the latest flashpoint in the culture wars. Post-Dobbs, red and blue states are hard at work codifying different approaches within their boundaries. However, pills, women, transactions, medical services, and information will cross those boundaries. Both sides already fight about who gets to regulate such boundary-crossing activity with each accusing the other of trespassing on the regulatory space of their disagreeing neighbors. This is dangerous terrain. A house divided against itself needs tools to mediate and constructively tackle conflict. Without such tools, divisions will deepen and provide an endless stream of incidents to further divide the country. The choice …

Living Traditionalism, Sherif Girgis

Journal Articles

From the Article

This Article offers the first comprehensive analysis of the Court’s living traditionalism, which turns out to include scores of cases spanning every subject and Justices of every stripe. Next, the Article identifies a fundamental but previously unrecognized tension in the method itself: If the Court gives living-traditionalist cases full weight as precedent, it defeats the reasons for using the method at all. Put another way, it is incoherent to treat political practices as a ratchet: capable of moving law in one direction (e.g., against a right in 2022) but not the other (in favor of the right …

Constitutional Law—Dobbs V. Jackson Women’S Health Organization Will Likely Have A Negative, Disproportionate Impact On Women Of Color And Reassert Inferiority, Makiya Turntine

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Freedom Not To See A Doctor: The Path Toward Over-The-Counter Abortion Pills, Lewis Grossman

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

American courts and lawmakers are engaged in an epic struggle over the fate of abortion pills. While some anti-abortion activists are attempting to drive the pills off the market entirely, supporters of reproductive rights are striving to make them more easily accessible. This Article advances the latter mission with a bold proposal: FDA should consider allowing abortion pills to be sold over the counter (OTC). Abortion rights supporters argue that FDA should repeal the special distribution and use restrictions it unnecessarily imposes on mifepristone, one of two drugs in the medication abortion regimen. Even if FDA removed these restrictions, however, …

Reevaluating Regional Law Reform Strategies After Dobbs, Jamie Abrams

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This article studies the triad of 2016 social media campaigns known as “#AskDr.Kasich,” “#askbevinaboutmyvag,” and “#PeriodsforPence.” While these campaigns, each located in the regional mid-South, were motivated by restrictive state abortion bills, they uniquely positioned menstruation and women’s bodies at the center of their activism—not abortion alone. They leveraged, as a political fault line, the contradiction of these states’ governors’ perceived disgust relating to basic women’s reproductive health, relative to their patriarchal assuredness in regulating and controlling women’s bodies.

In so doing, they tapped into meaningful disruptions in the geographies, religiosities, and masculinities of abortion politics. These campaigns achieved regional …

The Ripple Effects Of Dobbs On Health Care Beyond Wanted Abortion, Maya Manian

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The Supreme Court’s momentous decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn fifty years of precedent on the constitutional right to abortion represents a sea of change, not only in constitutional law, but also in the public health landscape. Although state laws on abortion are still evolving after Dobbs, the decision almost immediately wreaked havoc on the delivery of medical care for both patients seeking abortion care and those not actively seeking to terminate a pregnancy.

This Article also argues that focusing the public’s attention on the deleterious consequences of abortion bans for health care beyond wanted abortion …

Out Of Bounds?: Abortion, Choice Of Law, And A Modest Role For Congress, Susan Frelich Appleton

Scholarship@WashULaw

This invited contribution to a symposium on the multiple intersections of family law and constitutional law grapples with the emerging problems of jurisdictional competition and choice of law in interstate abortion situations in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—as abortion-hostile states seek to impose restrictions beyond their borders and welcoming states seek to become havens for abortion patients, regardless of their domicile. Grounded in a conflict-of-laws perspective, the essay lays out the interstate abortion chaos invited by Dobbs and the threat to our federal system that it presents, given Congress’s failure to codify a national right to …

Ordered Liberty After Dobbs, Linda C. Mcclain, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay explores the implications of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization for the future of substantive due process (SDP) liberties protecting personal autonomy, bodily integrity, familial relationships (including marriage), sexuality, and reproduction. We situate Dobbs in the context of prior battles on the Supreme Court over the proper interpretive approach to deciding what basic liberties the Due Process Clause (DPC) protects. As a framing device, we refer to two competing approaches as “the party of [Justice] Harlan or Casey” versus “the party of Glucksberg.” In Dobbs, the dissent co-authored by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan represents the party of …

State Constitutional Rights And Democratic Proportionality, Jessica Bulman-Pozen, Miriam Seifter

Faculty Scholarship

State constitutional law is in the spotlight. As federal courts retrench on abortion, democracy, and more, state constitutions are defining rights across the nation. Despite intermittent calls for greater attention to state constitutional theory, neither scholars nor courts have provided a comprehensive account of state constitutional rights or a coherent framework for their adjudication. Instead, many state courts import federal interpretive practices that bear little relationship to state constitutions or institutions.

This Article seeks to begin a new conversation about state constitutional adjudication. It first shows how in myriad defining ways state constitutions differ from the U.S. Constitution: They protect …

Alito Versus Roe V. Wade: Dobbs As A Means Of Circumvention, Avoidance, Attenuation And Betrayal Of The Constitution, Antony Hilton

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

There can be no argument that Justice Alito is a learned justice of great knowledge and reason, and has a superb grasp of the law. As such, despite any opposition to or disagreement with his legal opinions, he is deserving of respect for his intellectual prowess, in general and as it relates to the Constitution. Notwithstanding all the aforementioned, wrong is wrong.

In Defense Of The Juggernaut: The Ethical And Constitutional Argument For Prosecutorial Discretion, David A. Lord

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Within days of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, progressive prosecutors throughout the country announced that if their jurisdictions enacted restrictions on abortion, they would not prosecute the individuals who had these procedures or the doctors who performed them. This is the latest example of situations, like drug crimes, illegal gun possession, and other offenses, where prosecutors have declined to enforce a state law as a matter of public policy. Critics of this broad use of prosecutorial discretion have argued that it violates the constitutional separation of powers.

This Article argues that prosecutorial discretion is well-founded in American …

Pro-Choice (Of Law): Extraterritorial Application Of State Law Using Abortion As A Case Study, Marnie Leonard

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Madison Underwood was scheduled to receive a life-saving abortion at a clinic in Tennessee when her doctor told her the procedure had been canceled. The Supreme Court had overturned the constitutional right to abortion a few days prior. Although Underwood’s abortion was still legal in Tennessee, her doctor felt performing the procedure was too risky with the law changing so quickly.

Symposium: The Future Of Reproductive Rights: Perilous Private Enforcement Strategies: From Posses And Citizen's Arrest To Texas Heartbeat Statutes, Jennifer A. Brobst

ConLawNOW

The utility of state private enforcement statutes restricting abortion in Texas and other states is worthy of close scrutiny. Placing private enforcement in historical context aids in understanding when it may be a sustainable strategy. First, the strategy of involving the populace in the enforcement of legislative mandates has a long history in the United States. Self-help is a necessity where law enforcement is not equipped to prevent and respond to every call for assistance. Citizen’s arrest, posse comitatus, and mandatory reporting of misconduct by citizens, including professional misconduct, all involve private action for the common good in state and …

A Way Forward After Dobbs: Human Rights Advocacy And Self-Managed Abortion In The United States, Kelly Keglovits

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Even in the era before Dobbs, wherein the Supreme Court repeatedly classified abortion as a "fundamental right," the ability to have an abortion was inaccessible in many parts of the United States. The irony that a "fundamental right" was so difficult to exercise results from how Constitutional rights are understood, which left many open-ended avenues for states to bring restrictions. International Human Rights law, however, offers a more optimistic and accountable approach to steps forward in increasing abortion access—illustrating a need to bring a human rights-based approach home. Dobbs has eviscerated any concept of federal protections for abortion, severely worsening …

The Legal Origins Of Catholic Conscientious Objection, Jeremy Kessler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article traces the origins of Catholic conscientious objection as a theory and practice of American constitutionalism. It argues that Catholic conscientious objection emerged during the 1960s from a confluence of left-wing and right-wing Catholic efforts to participate in American democratic culture more fully. The refusal of the American government to allow legitimate Catholic conscientious objection to the Vietnam War became a cause célèbre for clerical and lay leaders and provided a blueprint for Catholic legal critiques of other forms of federal regulation in the late 1960s and early 1970s—most especially regulations concerning the provision of contraception and abortion.

Over …

Symposium: The Future Of Reproductive Rights: Concrete Reliance On Stare Decisis In A Post-Dobbs World, Michael Gentithes

ConLawNOW

This Article will describe two ways in which Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has muddied the Supreme Court’s precedent on precedent. First, it will examine how the Court’s decision to overrule Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey undermines not only its substantive due process holding, but also its status as a precedent on precedent. Without Casey in place, Dobbs further elevates a weakened version of stare decisis that has been ascendant on the Court in recent decades, one which threatens to undermine legal stability in all areas of constitutional law. Second, the Article will examine the Dobbs majority’s …

The Dobbs Effect: Abortion Rights In The Rear-View Mirror And The Civil Rights Crisis That Lies Ahead, Terri Day, Danielle Weatherby

William & Mary Law Review Online

On June 24, 2022, seven weeks after the first-ever leak of a draft opinion, the United States Supreme Court circulated its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, defying stare decisis, overruling fifty years of precedent, and shattering the hopes of millions of Americans, who wished the leaked opinion was a fiction that would never come to be.

As the leaked draft forewarned, Roe v. Wadeis no longer the law of the land. No longer is a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy—to exercise bodily autonomy and be free to control the trajectory of her life—protected as a fundamental …

Dobbs Is Not A Religion Case, Bruce Ledewitz

Law Faculty Publications

I was unhappy, but not surprised, to see Canopy Forum including Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overruled Roe v. Wade, in a call for submissions under the rubric, “Law and Religion in Pressing Supreme Court Cases.” I was not surprised because, for years, many critics have labeled pro-life opposition to Roe a purely religious viewpoint. But there is nothing inherently religious about qualms concerning abortion, nor is there anything specifically religious in the Dobbs majority opinion.

The End Of Roe V Wade And New Legal Frontiers On The Constitutional Right To Abortion, I. Glenn Cohen, Melissa Murray, Lawrence O. Gostin

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

On June 24, 2002, the US Supreme Court ended the constitutional right to abortion in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The Court’s majority decision authored by Justice Samuel Alito was substantially the same as a draft opinion leaked a month earlier. The regulation of abortion will now be decided by the states, with about half currently or will soon ban or severely restrict abortion access. In this Viewpoint, we explain the Dobbs ruling and what it means for physicians, public health, and society.

We focus on new legal frontiers in the constitutional right to abortion, including medication abortion …

Tort Law Implications Of Compelled Physician Speech, Nadia N. Sawicki

Indiana Law Journal

Abortion-specific informed consent laws in many states compel physicians to communicate state-mandated information that is arguably inaccurate, immaterial, and inconsistent with their professional obligations. These laws face ongoing First Amendment challenges as violations of the constitutional right against compelled speech. This Article argues that laws compelling physician speech also pose significant problems that should concern scholars of tort law.

State laws that impose tort liability on physicians who refuse to communicate a state-mandated message often do so by deviating from foundational principles of tort law. Not only do they change the substantive disclosure duties of physicians under informed consent law, …

The Link Between Voting Rights And The Abortion Ruling, Katherine A. Shaw, Leah Litman, Melissa Murray

Online Publications

The Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization gives states the maximum amount of freedom to restrict abortion. The decision is so sweeping that, under its logic, states could ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest; they may even be able — as the dissent notes — to prohibit abortions in circumstances in which a doctor believes the procedure is necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant person.

Think State Supreme Courts Will Save Abortion Rights? Think Again., Neal Devins

Popular Media

No abstract provided.