Planned Parenthood v. Casey

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Supreme Court, 1992

Facts of the Case

In 1982, Pennsylvania enacted the Abortion Control Act, which imposed several restrictions on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. These included informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, parental consent for minors, and spousal notification. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania challenged the constitutionality of the Act, arguing that it violated the right to privacy established in Roe v. Wade. The case was brought before the Supreme Court to determine whether these provisions were constitutional.

Constitutional Question

Do the provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act that require informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, parental consent for minors, and spousal notification violate a woman’s right to an abortion as guaranteed by Roe v. Wade?

Arguments

For Planned Parenthood:

  • The restrictions imposed by the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act create undue burdens on a woman’s right to choose an abortion.
  • The spousal notification requirement places women at risk of domestic violence and infringes upon their privacy and autonomy.
  • The provisions violate the principles established in Roe v. Wade, which protects a woman’s right to obtain an abortion without excessive government interference.

For Casey (Governor of Pennsylvania):

  • The state has a legitimate interest in protecting the health of the mother and the life of the fetus, which justifies the regulations.
  • The provisions are reasonable measures designed to ensure informed and deliberate decisions regarding abortions.
  • The requirements do not constitute an undue burden on the right to obtain an abortion and are within the state’s regulatory authority.

The Decision

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, reaffirmed the core holding of Roe v. Wade but upheld most of the Pennsylvania provisions. The Court established the “undue burden” standard, which states that regulations are unconstitutional if they place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability. The majority opinion, written by Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, held that:

  • The informed consent, 24-hour waiting period, and parental consent provisions did not constitute an undue burden and were upheld.
  • The spousal notification requirement was deemed an undue burden and was struck down.

Significance

Planned Parenthood v. Casey is a pivotal case that reaffirmed the constitutional right to have an abortion while allowing states to impose certain regulations, as long as they do not create an undue burden. The decision modified the legal framework established by Roe v. Wade, shifting from a strict scrutiny standard to the undue burden standard for evaluating abortion regulations. This ruling allowed for greater state regulation of abortion and set the stage for subsequent legal battles over abortion rights. The case highlighted the continuing national debate over reproductive rights and the balance between state interests and individual liberties.