Planned Parenthood v Casey

Planned Parenthood v Casey - Rita Kim Case Name and...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

Rita Kim Case Name and Citation: Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey , 505 U.S. 833 (1992) Parties: Plaintiff – Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania (five abortion clinics, one physician representing himself and a class of physicians who provide abortion services) Defendant – Casey (the state of Pennsylvania) Statement of Facts: The state of Pennsylvania enacted the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act in 1982 and amended it in 1988 and 1989. The Act contained the following five provisions: (1) informed consent by the woman seeking an abortion, (2) after being provided with information by the physician there is a 24 hour waiting period before the abortion procedure can take place, (3) minors seeking an abortion are required to provide informed consent from one of the parents, although a judicial bypass exists, (4) notification of the husband of the intended abortion and (5) abortion facilities are required to regular reporting. Before these provisions went into effect, the petitioners sued the state of Pennsylvania seeking declaratory and injunctive relief on the grounds that these provisions were unconstitutional. The District Court ruled in favor of the petitioner deeming all five provisions unconstitutional. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld all provisions with the exception of provision #4 which requires notification of the husband. Claim(s): Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania claimed that the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act’s provisions were an unnecessary, added obstacle in a woman’s right to decide whether she wanted to get an abortion, a right very clearly decided in Roe v. Wade .
Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Spring '14
  • Roe v. Wade, Case Brief, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Abortion Control Act, undue burden

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern