Planned Parenthood v Casey is a landmark Supreme Court case regarding abortion and abortion rights. The case made its way through the District Courts, to the Court of Appeals and finally to the Supreme Court in April of 1992. In 1988, Pennsylvania legislature made changes to their abortion control act. These changes included, parental consent if the woman is a minor, spousal notification, informed consent and a mandatory 24 hour waiting period. Clinics providing abortion services were also required under the new laws to provide the state with the documentation stating the abortion occurred.
A group of 5 clinics and several doctors filed a lawsuit against the state of Pennsylvania on the grounds that the laws were unconstitutional. Their arguments against the ACT included that the ratifications violated the previous ruling in Roe v Wade, it places an undue burden on women who had to report to their husbands, as well as violating the women’s right to medical privacy. The plaintiff sought a way for women to decide for themselves if an abortion was right for them or not without fear of retaliation by a spouse or having to release her medical records to the state. The defendant …show more content…
The justices in favor included, Justice O’Connor, Justice Blackmun, Justice Stevens, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Souter. Justices O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter wrote the majority opinion. The majority opinion upheld that parental consent, informed consent and a 24 hour waiting period were all constitutional. It negated the spousal notification clause stating that it placed an undue burden on women seeking an abortion if they are married. Justices Blackmun and Stevens wrote the concurring opinion. In their opinion they agreed with decision to negate spousal notification, however they did not agree with the decision to keep parental consent, informed consent and the 24 hour waiting period in
A group of 5 clinics and several doctors filed a lawsuit against the state of Pennsylvania on the grounds that the laws were unconstitutional. Their arguments against the ACT included that the ratifications violated the previous ruling in Roe v Wade, it places an undue burden on women who had to report to their husbands, as well as violating the women’s right to medical privacy. The plaintiff sought a way for women to decide for themselves if an abortion was right for them or not without fear of retaliation by a spouse or having to release her medical records to the state. The defendant …show more content…
The justices in favor included, Justice O’Connor, Justice Blackmun, Justice Stevens, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Souter. Justices O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter wrote the majority opinion. The majority opinion upheld that parental consent, informed consent and a 24 hour waiting period were all constitutional. It negated the spousal notification clause stating that it placed an undue burden on women seeking an abortion if they are married. Justices Blackmun and Stevens wrote the concurring opinion. In their opinion they agreed with decision to negate spousal notification, however they did not agree with the decision to keep parental consent, informed consent and the 24 hour waiting period in