IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/198676121452-1455_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Abortion and the Supreme Court: Why legislative motive matters

Author

Listed:
  • Glantz, L.H.

Abstract

Glantz reviews the 1986 Supreme Court decision, Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, that struck down Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act. The Justices found fault (5-4) with the statute's provisions relating to informed consent, reporting of abortion statistics, and post-viability abortions. Glantz notes that the Court for the first time used "antiabortion" to characterize a piece of legislation. In Glantz's view, Thornburgh was meant to reaffirm Roe v. Wade and to signal the states that future abortion-related laws will be strictly scrutinized for legislative intent as well as for constitutionality. A good faith desire to protect maternal health is the only justification the Court will recognize for regulating abortion. Glantz concludes that the majority of the Justices, anticipating changes in Court personnel, intended to re-affirm the right to make personal decisions without inappropriate state interference.

Suggested Citation

  • Glantz, L.H., 1986. "Abortion and the Supreme Court: Why legislative motive matters," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 76(12), pages 1452-1455.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1986:76:12:1452-1455_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1986:76:12:1452-1455_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.