Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994

Hodgson v. Minnesota - Judicial Background, The Case At Hand, The Lower Courts Rule, The Supreme Court Affirms The Court Of Appeals Decision

abortion reproductive health petitioner

Petitioner

Jane Hodgson, et al.

Respondent

State of Minnesota, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

That a Minnesota law requiring minors to notify both their parents before obtaining an abortion was unconstitutional.

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

John Tunheim

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Janet Benshoof

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens (writing for the Court)

Justices Dissenting

Anthony M. Kennedy, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Byron R. White

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

25 June 1990

Decision

Affirmed the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals holding the two-parent notification policy unconstitutional where there is no provision for judicial bypass.

Significance

The Supreme Court's decision in Hodgson v. Minnesota slowed the trend toward restriction of abortion rights begun in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. However, its split judgment reflected the ambivalence of the Court in cases dealing with statutory constraints on the availability of abortion.

Impact

The "split decision" issued by the Court in Hodgson v. Minnesota did little to clarify the Court's position on the restriction of abortion rights, but provided grist for both sides of the issue in subsequent cases.

Related Cases

  • Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
  • Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 462 U.S. 416 (1983).
  • Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989).
  • Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).
Horton v. California - Significance, Background Laws And Decisions, The Crime And The Evidence, The Case Of Terry Horton [next] [back] Harris v. Forklift - Significance, Harris Files A Lawsuit, Discrimination By Any Other Name, Justice Clarence Thomas, Further Readings

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or