Authors

Tom R. Tyler

Document Type

Article

Comments

Legitimacy and the Empowerment of Discretionary Legal Authority: The United States Supreme Court and Abortion Rights (with G. Mitchell), 43 Duke Law Journal 703-814 (1994)

Abstract

In Planned Parenthood of Southern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the U.S. Supreme Court directly confronted the question of Roe v. Wade's continuing viability. Many commentators speculated that Roe would be overruled, tossing the abortion issue to Congress and state legislatures. Yet a majority of the Justices refused to overrule the central holding of Roe, which provides constitutional protection for limited abortion rights. Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, in an opinion joined in relevant part by Justices Stevens and Blackmun, relied on the concepts of substantive due process, "principles of institutional integrity," and "the rule of stare decisis" to preserve the constitutional status of a woman's right to an abortion. A different collection of Justices upheld states' rights to erect various barriers to the abortion right as long as they do not pose "substantial obstacle[s]."

Date of Authorship for this Version

1994

Keywords

Legitimacy and the Empowerment of Discretionary Legal Authority: The United States Supreme Court and Abortion Rights (with G. Mitchell), 43 Duke Law Journal 703-814 (1994)

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS