Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey - Significance, Win Some, Lose Some, The Dark Horse, Massachusetts's Abortion Consent Act

court justices petitioner decision

Petitioner

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania

Respondent

Robert P. Casey, Governor of Pennsylvania, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

That under the due process clause of the Constitution, the 1988 and 1989 amendments to the Pennsylvania abortion law were illegal.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Kathryn Kolbert

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Ernest D. Preate, Jr., Attorney General of Pennsylvania

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Anthony M. Kennedy (writing for the Court), Sandra Day O'Connor, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens

Justices Dissenting

William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

29 June 1992

Decision

Judicial respect for precedent required the Court to reaffirm Roe v. Wade, the Court's 1973 decision making abortion legal in the United States. The justices declared Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act law constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part.

Related Cases

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989).

Sources

Massachusetts General Laws Annotated, Chapter 112, Section 12S.

Additional Topics

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey - Significance

In the words of Pulitzer Prize winning historian David J. Garrow, "Casey was a watershed event in American history." It resolved a national dispute over abortion by upholding the essentials of Roe v. Wade while permitting Pennsylvania to regulate abortions as long as the state did not place an undue burden on women. In 1989, the Supreme Court allowed the states more leeway in regulating abortions,…

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey - Win Some, Lose Some

The district court declared the law unconstitutional except for one provision requiring physicians to tell women the age of her embryo or fetus. The case then went through two appeals--on 21 October 1991, and 30 October 1992. The Court of Appeals, striking down the husband-notification provision, upheld the others. The stage was set for Supreme Court appeals by both sides. The oral arguments began…

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey - The Dark Horse

The final vote would rest on Souter's actions. From earlier conversations he suspected that O'Connor, Kennedy, and himself, could agree that the Pennsylvania law could be upheld and still leave Roe intact. However, Chief Justice Rehnquist had already begun to draft the Court's opinion to overturn Wade, assuming the other judges agreed with him. Then, unexpectedly, Kennedy changed his mind, joining…

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey - Massachusetts's Abortion Consent Act

In 1974, the chief legislative body in Massachusetts passed an abortion consent act that became part of the commonwealth's legal code. The law states in part that a doctor cannot perform an abortion without written consent from the pregnant patient. The consent form should be in simple-to-understand language and contain information regarding the procedure the physician will have to perform in orde…

Citing this material

Please include a link to this page if you have found this material useful for research or writing a related article. Content on this website is from high-quality, licensed material originally published in print form. You can always be sure you're reading unbiased, factual, and accurate information.

Highlight the text below, right-click, and select “copy”. Paste the link into your website, email, or any other HTML document.