Abstract

https://ssrn.com/abstract=2838562
 


 



The Difference a Whole Woman Makes: Protection for the Abortion Right After Whole Woman's Health


Linda Greenhouse


Yale Law School

Reva Siegel


Yale University - Law School

August 16, 2016

Yale Law Journal Forum, Vol. 126, 2016
Yale Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 578

Abstract:     
In this essay we consider the implications of Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt for the future of abortion regulation. We draw on our recent article on health-justified abortion restrictions — Casey and the Clinic Closings: When “Protecting Health” Obstructs Choice, 125 Yale L.J. 1428 (2016) — to describe the social movement strategy and the lower court rulings that led to the Supreme Court’s decision. We show that in Whole Woman’s Health the Court applies the undue burden framework of Planned Parenthood v. Casey in ways that have the potential to reshape the abortion conflict.

In Whole Woman’s Health, the Court insisted on an evidentiary basis for a state’s claim to restrict abortion in the interests of protecting women’s health. The Court required judges to balance the demonstrated benefit of the law against the burden that a shrunken abortion infrastructure will have on the ability of women to exercise their constitutional rights.

A crucial aspect of the Court’s decision in Whole Woman’s Health is the guidance it provides judges in determining the burdens and benefits to balance in the Casey framework. Particularly notable, even unexpected, is the Court’s capacious understanding of “burden” as the cumulative impact of abortion regulation on women’s experience of exercising their constitutional rights. By clarifying what counts as a burden and what counts as a benefit to be balanced within the Casey framework, the decision constrains regulations explicitly aimed at protecting fetal life as well as those ostensibly intended to protect women’s health. In these and other ways, Whole Woman’s Health robustly reaffirms judicial protection for the abortion right.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 18

Keywords: abortion, balancing, health, evidence, undue burden, Casey, privacy, substantive due process


Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: September 15, 2016 ; Last revised: September 27, 2016

Suggested Citation

Greenhouse, Linda and Siegel, Reva, The Difference a Whole Woman Makes: Protection for the Abortion Right After Whole Woman's Health (August 16, 2016). Yale Law Journal Forum, Vol. 126, 2016; Yale Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 578. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2838562

Contact Information

Linda Greenhouse
Yale Law School ( email )
P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States
203-432-2514 (Phone)
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/LGreenhouse.htm

Reva B. Siegel (Contact Author)
Yale University - Law School ( email )
P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States
203-432-6791 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,284
Downloads: 488
Download Rank: 44,138