Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt: Judicial Review When the Court Wants To
12 Pages Posted: 22 Dec 2016
Date Written: November 28, 2016
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt demonstrates that federal courts generally, and the Supreme Court specifically, are perfectly capable of engaging in legitimate judicial review of legislation that interferes with the exercise of rights and liberties. However, the Court has largely abandoned this mode of review in cases involving rights that the Court has deemed “non-fundamental.” This has resulted in arbitrary line drawing and thus arbitrary application of actual review. As Justice Thomas observed in his dissent, this arbitrariness threatens the Court’s legitimacy as it suggests that little more than naked policy preferences underlie the Court’s selective approach to judicial review. Whole Woman’s Health provides a template for effective, legitimate judicial review.
Keywords: Judicial Review, Abortion, Whole Woman's Health, Economic Liberty
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation