Roe established abortion rights 20 years later Casey paved the way for

In Justice Samuel Alito's leaked draft opinion that was published Monday night, the Supreme Court seems poised to roll back the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which established the right to an abortion. Along with it, another case on abortion will also be affected: Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. The 5-4 decision upheld Roe in 1992, but paved the way for more restrictions on abortion access because it declared that restrictions were allowed as long as there was not an "undue burden." It was the first time the court set a new standard on validity of certain laws that restricted abortions."Roe and Casey are the twin pillars of the court's jurisprudence," on abortion, Melissa Murray, a professor of law at New York University, told NPR. In 1988 and 1989, Pennsylvania changed its abortion laws and added several restrictions for certain people seeking abortions. The changes required informed consent and a 24-hour waiting period before someone could receive an abortion. In most instances, a minor seeking an abortion had to get consent from at least one parent. And if a married woman sought an abortion, she had to say that she had notified her husband. Several doctors and abortion providers sued and the case went to a district court, which ruled that the law was unconstitutional. An appeals court — which then included Alito — said all of the state's restrictions were allowed, except for the requirement for a married woman seeking an abortion to say she had gotten consent from her spouse. Alito was the lone dissenting judge in that ruling. The Supreme Court upheld the appellate court's decision. The court ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood, saying that the right to an abortion was still protected. But Casey also changed some aspects of what had been determined in Roe. Under Roe, a trimester framework was used to set standards on when an abortion could be restricted. In the first trimester of pregnancy, an abortion was unrestricted. In the second trimester, the state was allowed to add some restrictions but not outlaw abortions in the interest of the pregnant person's health. In the third trimester, the fetus is considered viable, and the state could regulate or outlaw abortions in the interest of the fetus, except when it was necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant person. Casey essentially scrapped the trimester framework. The justices said that in order to keep the right to an abortion but also recognize that the state has a "profound interest in potential life," there should be a new standard of "undue burden" applied. As long as an abortion restriction does not add an extra burden or "substantial obstacle" onto the person seeking an abortion before the fetus is viable, the restriction is allowed. And that's how the legality of abortion restrictions have been determined since 1992.


All data is taken from the source: http://npr.org
Article Link: https://www.npr.org/2022/05/06/109688...


#abortion #newspaper #newsworldbbc #usanewstoday #newstodayheadlines #newstodayoncnn #