Judicial Review

Home

Timeline

Margaret Sanger

March for Women's Lives

Religion

Organizations

Legislation

Roe v. Wade

International

Quotations

Sources

Through the power of judicial review, the Supreme Court has a great deal of control over reproductive rights issues. The holdings on cases throughout the last 100 years have provided some of the greatest advances in the struggle for reproductive rights.

Current Supreme Court Justices and their stances on reproductive issues

Reproductive Rights Court Cases Chronologically:
US v. One Package of Japanese Pessaries (1930)
Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors (1940)
Consumers Union v. Frank Walker (1944)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)*
United States v. Vuitch (1971)*
Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)
Roe v Wade (1973)*
Doe v Bolton, 410 US 179 (1973)*
Commonwealth v. Edelin (1975)
Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth (1976)
Bellotti v. Baird (1976)
Maher v. Roe (1977), Beal v. Doe (1977), Poelker v. Doe (1977)
Carey v. Population Services International (1977)
Bellotti v. Baird II (1979)
Colautti v. Franklin (1979)
Harris v McRae (1980)
H. L. v. Matheson (1981)
City of v. Akron Center of Reproductive Health (1983)
Planned Parenthood of Kansas City, Missouri v. Ashcroft (1983)
Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp (1983)
Thornburg v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986)
Diamond v. Charles (1986)

Babbitt v. Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona (1986)
Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989)*
Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1990)
Hodgson v. State of Minnesota (1990)

New York Second Circuit Court of Appeals (1990)
Rust v. Sullivan (1991)
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)*
National Organization for Women v. Scheidler (1994)*
Madsen v. Women's Health Center, 114 US 798 (1994)*
Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York (1997)
Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 US 914 (2000)*
Hill v. Colorado (2000)
Ferguson v. City of Charleston (2001)
Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) v. Ashcroft (2004), National Abortion Federation (NAF) v. Ashcroft (2004), Carhart v. Ashcroft (2004) *

*The most influential and significant court cases on reproductive rights of the century

 

US v. One Package of Japanese Pessaries (1930):
Judge Augustus Hand US Circuit Court of Appeals stops short of declaring the Comstock Laws unconstitutional but orders their liberalizing. This decision was based on contemporary data which found that birth control was not obscene due to the damages unplanned pregnancy and the benefits of contraceptives. This ruling only applies to New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.

Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors (1940):
This case upholds the Connecticut Comstock statute which prohibits the use of contraceptives and denies physicians the ability of prescribing them.

Consumers Union v. Frank Walker (1944):
This case further liberalizes the Comstock laws to allow pamphlets on effective contraceptives to be sent through the mail upon request.

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965):
This Supreme Court case overturns Connecticut law that prohibits the use of contraceptives for married couples. This case challenged and overturned the 1961 ruling in Poe v. Ullman which upheld Connecticut law prohibiting the distribution on the grounds that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process clause had not been enforced for years

United States v. Vuitch (1971):
This case was brought to the Supreme Court challenging a law in Washington DC which allowed abortion in cases where the health or life of the mother was at risk. This law was upheld stating that “health” meant both “psychological and physical well-being”.

Top of page

Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972):
This case declares a Massachusetts statute banning the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried people unconstitutional.

Roe v. Wade (1973):

Doe v. Bolton, 410 US 179 (1973):
In this Supreme Court case, a 1968 Georgia abortion law was challenged that prohibited abortion except when necessary for medical reasons, or in cases of rape, incest, or fetal abnormalities. The law required that approval had to be granted by two doctors and a committee and that it must be performed in a hospital. The Supreme Court struck down this law on the basis of the constitutional guarantee of privacy. This decision defines expands the definition of health decided on in United States v. Vuitch (1971) so that "health" included "all factors" that affect the woman, including "physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age."

Commonwealth v. Edelin (1975):
In this case, Dr. Kenneth Edelin was convicted of manslaughter for performing an abortion on a 20 week old fetus at Boston City Hospital. This abortion was legal under Massachusetts law. The decision of the Superior Court of Boston was overturned in 1976 by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts. The court rules that legal abortions can only be considered manslaughter if the fetus is alive and outside the mothers body.

Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth (1976):
In this case, the Supreme Court declared the Missouri laws that require the consent of parents (of minors) and spouses in order to obtain an abortion unconstitutional. It also struck down the portion of the law that prohibited saline amniocentesis as a method of abortion. It upheld the right of state to require a minor to receive permission of one parent but that there must exist a clause containing a “judicial bypass” option.

Top of page

Bellotti v. Baird (1976):
In this case, the Supreme Court also considers a parental notification law; this time in Massachusetts. However, this law required that minors must obtain consent of either parents or a judge in order to obtain an abortion. The case is returns to the Massachusetts Supreme Court with instructions to provide clearer and more precise guidelines for on what grounds judges may grant or deny abortions to minors.

Maher v. Roe (1977), Beal v. Doe (1977), Poelker v. Doe (1977):
This Supreme Court case declares that states and local governments are not obligated to fund abortions in public assistance programs like Medicaid. It also decides that localities may refuse to provide abortions in publicly funded hospitals even if the abortion is medically necessary.

Carey v. Population Services International (1977):
This Supreme Court case struck down a New York law that severely restricted access to contraceptives. It prohibited the sale of contraceptives to minors under 16, displaying and advertising contraceptives, and restricted the sale of nonprescription methods of birth control to drug stores.

Bellotti v. Baird II (1979):
Bellotti v. Baird is appealed to the Supreme Court which upholds the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling that any laws requiring parental consent prior to minors receiving abortions must include a “judicial bypass” clause.

Top of page

Colautti v. Franklin (1979):
This Supreme Court case reviewed the constitutionality of a Pennsylvania law that required that doctors must determine whether the fetus “is or may be viable” immediately prior to performing an abortion. This law was struck down on the grounds of the ambiguity of the meaning of viable or “may be viable” and that such a decision must be made on case-by-case basis.

Harris v McRae (1980):
This Supreme Court case reviews the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendments which restrict federal funding for family planning and abortions. The laws were upheld on the grounds that there exists no constitutional guarantee for women to receive abortions at the public’s expense and that by encouraging childbirth to abortion except in extreme cases that the law is related to the legitimate governmental goal of preserving life.

H. L. v. Matheson (1981):
In this case the Supreme Court upholds a Utah parental notification statute. This statute requires the physician to notify the parents of a minor prior to performing an abortion unless there is proof that harm could result to the minor because of the notification.

Top of page

City of v. Akron Center of Reproductive Health (1983):
The Supreme Court reviews a restrictive ordinance of the city of Akron, Ohio that requires a 24 hour waiting period and, an “informed consent” procedure where the teen receives extensive information and photographs on the details of the pregnancy and abortion process. It also requires the consent of both parents or a judge and that abortions occurring after the second trimester occur in a hospital. This ordinance was overturned on the grounds that states can only require that second trimester abortions are performed by licensed physicians not in hospitals.

Planned Parenthood of Kansas City, Missouri v. Ashcroft (1983):
The Supreme Court in this case reaffirms their decision in City of Akron v. Akron Center of Reproductive Health that states can only require that licensed physicians perform second trimester abortions not that they take place in hospitals. It also upholds the rights of states to require pathology tests, parental consent or judicial bypass, and the presence of multiple doctors in first trimester abortions.

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp (1983):
In this case the Supreme Court allows the mailing of unsolicited advertisements for contraceptives which strikes down the last of the Comstock laws.

Thornburg v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) and Diamond v. Charles (1986):
These Supreme Court cases struck down laws that required informed consent, waiting periods, and that the only methods that will most likely result in a baby surviving an abortion (“post-viability abortions”) be used.

Top of page

Babbitt v. Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona (1986):
In this case, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that struck down a state law prohibiting state funding for family planning to organizations that provided abortions and abortion counseling.

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989):
In the Supreme Court ruling, the Supreme Court partially reversed their earlier Roe v. Wade decision to significantly compromise abortion rights. In this case, it upheld portions of a Missouri law holding that it was not a constitutional requirement that public facilities such as hospitals be available for abortion services. This ruling created the precedent for allowing states to ban abortions in hospitals.

Top of page

Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1990), Hodgson v. State of Minnesota (1990):
In these Supreme Court cases, the court upholds respectively one and two parent notification laws that included judicial bypass clauses.

New York Second Circuit Court of Appeals (1990):
This case examined and upheld the “Mexico City policy.”

Rust v. Sullivan (1991):
In this case, the Supreme Court upholds the gag rule on Title X clinics. Congress then attempts to pass a law overturning the policy but is unable to overcome George Bush’s veto.

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992):
In this case, the Supreme Court reviewed challenges to several Pennsylvania regulations on abortions. These regulations required informed consent, spousal notification, parental notification and a 24- hour waiting period prior to receiving an abortion. This case is significant because it was expected that the court would overrule Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade was reaffirmed in the end but increased the ability of states to place restrictions on access to abortions with a new weaker definition of “undue burden.” Under the new definition the 24 hour waiting period, informed consent, and informed consent regulations were upheld and the spousal notification was struck down. It also changed the original trimester timeline for permitting abortions. The new holding was based on the viability of the fetus (approximately 22-23 weeks) instead.

National Organization for Women v. Scheidler (1994):
In this case, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) can be applied to violent pro-choice activists that use violence to intimidate or force clinics to close. RICO is a law passed in 1970 originally intended for use against organized crime. It allows courts to attack “enterprises” that engage in a “pattern of racketeering.” The Supreme Court held that anti-abortion groups had "conspired to shut down abortion clinics through a pattern of racketeering activity." This decision was overturned in 2003.

Top of page

Madsen v. Women's Health Center, 114 US 798 (1994):
In this case, the Supreme Court reviewed injunctions prohibiting pro-life protesters from demonstrating in certain locals and ways outside health clinics that provide abortions and the homes of the employees. It upheld the creation of a 36 foot buffer zone around clinics, their parking lots and driveways. It did not uphold any other of the restrictions on protesting at employee’s homes, visual aids, approaching employees and patients without consent or noise levels. The ability to create buffer zones to protect clinic employees and patients was a significant win for pro-choice activists in a time of increasing violence and activism from pro-life supporters.

Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York (1997):
In this case, the Supreme Court upheld its earlier decision in Madsen v. Women’s Health Center that fixed buffer zones are allowed. This decision is on the grounds that these injunctions follow the government’s interest in ensuring public safety and protecting the right to receive medical services. However, it determines that floating buffer zones are unconstitutional as the place undue burden on the freedom of speech.

Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 US 914 (2000):
In this case, the Supreme Court reviewed a Nebraska law banning partial birth abortions. It was struck down on the grounds that it posed undue burden on a woman's ability to end her pregnancy because it could ban multiple methods of abortion and had no exemption clause protecting the mother’s health.

Hill v. Colorado (2000):
The Supreme Court upholds a Colorado statute creating “bubble zones” as constitutional. The statute prohibited individuals from approaching closer than eight feet any person who is within a 100 foot zone of the entrance of a clinic in order to leaflet, display a sign, or engage is protest, education, or counseling without the person’s consent.

Ferguson v. City of Charleston (2001):
In this Supreme Court case, the ruling protected the right to privacy of medical records. It held that all Americans had the right to seek medical services like testing without fear of unreasonable intrusion by the government or that their records will be shared with non-medical personnel without their consent.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) v. Ashcroft (2004), National Abortion Federation (NAF) v. Ashcroft (2004), Carhart v. Ashcroft (2004):
These are the three federal courts, in San Francisco, New York and Nebraska respectively, that reviewed cases challenging the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. All three courts declared the law unconstitutional. PPFA v. Ashcroft is currently on appeal.

Top of page

Last Updated 12/17/04
Questions or comments contact webmaster