Sunday, July 10, 2011

Planned Parenthood v. Casey: Weaker Than Roe, But "Better Than Nothing"

Tapped -- The American Prospect blog: Casey v. Planned Parenthood Is Not Nothing, by Scott Lemieux:

Image1 The recent spate of anti-abortion regulations in states across the country has made me pessimistic about the future of reproductive rights, but Irin Carmon is correct to note that the legal picture is not entirely bleak. The problem with landmark abortion-rights case Casey v. Planned Parenthood is   that the "undue burden" standard it applied to restrictions on abortion is that it's only as bad or good as the judge applying it. Precisely because the ruling says nothing about whether innovative abortion regulations are constitutional or not, in the hands of a good judge, the Casey precedent can be used against regulatory regimes intended to deny women access to safe abortions. . . .

Abortion, In the Courts | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Planned Parenthood v. Casey: Weaker Than Roe, But "Better Than Nothing":


Post a comment