Reproductive Rights Prof Blog

Editor: Caitlin E. Borgmann
CUNY School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Monday, January 13, 2014

Caroline Corbin on Distortions in Abortion Jurisprudence

Caroline CorbinCaroline Mala Corbin (University of Miami Law School) has posted Abortion Distortions on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

Two types of distortions often arise in abortion jurisprudence. The first is distortion of scientific fact. Too often abortion opponents distort medical facts and courts accept those distortions as true. Take, for example, the claim that abortion makes women depressed and suicidal. In fact, no reputable study supports any such causal link. Equally without scientific foundation is the claim that morning after pills like Plan B act as abortifacients. They do not. 

The second kind of distortion that occurs in abortion jurisprudence is that the normal doctrine does not apply. Thus, despite the fact that compelling someone to articulate the government’s ideology is anathema in free speech jurisprudence, courts have upheld mandatory abortion counseling laws that force doctors to serve as mouthpieces for the state’s viewpoint. Similarly, despite the fact that for-profit corporations have never been held to have religious rights, several courts have stayed application of the new contraception mandate on the grounds that it might violate the corporation’s "conscience." This abortion exceptionalism is problematic for women and for First Amendment jurisprudence.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/reproductive_rights/2014/01/caroline-mala-corbinuniversity-of-miami-law-school-has-posted-abortion-distortions-on-ssrn-here-is-the-abstract-two-type.html

Abortion, Scholarship and Research | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef01a3fc1d1f33970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Caroline Corbin on Distortions in Abortion Jurisprudence:

Comments

Post a comment