Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center
Significance, Standards Of Scrutiny, The Majority Opinion, Stevens Dissents In Part, Scalia Dissents
Petitioner
Judy Madsen, et al.
Respondent
Womens Health Center, Inc.
Petitioner's Claim
Portions of an injunction limiting the activities of abortion protesters violate First Amendment rights to free speech.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Matthew D. Staver
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Talbot D'Alemberte
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas
Justices Dissenting
Anthony M. Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
30 June 1994
Decision
The injunction is upheld in part and reversed in part.
Related Cases
- Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455 (1980).
- United States Postal Service v. Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations, 453 U.S. 114 (1981).
- International Society for Krishna Consciousness v. Lee, 505 U.S. 672 (1992).
- Operation Rescue v. Women's Health Center, 626 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 1993).
- Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York, 519 U.S. 357 (1997).
Additional topics
- Malice Green Beating Death Trials: 1993-2000
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council - Significance, Impact, Coastal Zones And The Law Of The Sea
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Significance
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Further Readings
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Standards Of Scrutiny
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - The Majority Opinion
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Stevens Dissents In Part
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Scalia Dissents
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994