Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 24, 2022, during the court's October 2021-2022 term. The case was argued on December 1, 2021. Show
The court reversed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings. In a 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Mississippi's abortion law at issue in the case. In a 5-4 vote, the court found there is no constitutional right to abortion and overruled Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (1992). Justice Samuel Alito delivered the court's majority opinion. Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh filed concurring opinions, and Chief Justice John Roberts filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan filed a dissenting opinion.[1] Click here for more information about the ruling. This case was one of three that SCOTUS heard during its October 2021 term that related to abortion. To read more about the background of each of those cases, the questions presented, and the outcomes, click here. The outcome of this case has the potential to impact the status of abortion regulations across the country. To learn more about what could potentially change, click here. HIGHLIGHTS
TimelineThe following timeline details key events in this case:
BackgroundOn March 19, 2018, Mississippi enacted the "Gestational Age Act" into state law. The law established requirements for doctors performing abortions. Specifically, an abortion could not be performed until a physician first determined and documented a fetus’s probable gestational age. The law prohibited abortions after the fifteenth week of pregnancy except in cases of medical emergencies or fetal abnormalities.[4] On the day the law was enacted, Jackson Women’s Health Organization ("the Clinic"), the only licensed abortion facility in Mississippi, challenged the law’s constitutionality in U.S. district court and requested an emergency temporary restraining order to block the law's enforcement. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi granted the request, concluding that the U.S. Supreme Court precedent did not allow states to ban abortions before the 24-week mark of a pregnancy when a fetus becomes viable. The Southern District of Mississippi granted summary judgment in favor of the Clinic, holding that the law was unconstitutional because "viability marks the earliest point at which the State’s interest in fetal life is constitutionally adequate to justify a legislative ban on nontherapeutic abortions."[4] The district court granted permanent injunctive relief, invalidating the law. Mississippi Department of Health state health officer Thomas Dobbs, in his official capacity, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit for review. The circuit court affirmed the Southern District of Mississippi's ruling on December 13, 2019, holding that the law was a ban on abortions and was unconstitutional.[2][4] Dobbs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on June 15, 2020, and the court granted review in the case on May 17, 2021. Questions presentedThe petitioner presented three questions to the U.S. Supreme Court. When the court accepted the case, it limited review to the following question:[3] Questions presented:
Oral argumentThe U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on December 1, 2021. AudioAudio of oral argument:[6] TranscriptTranscript of oral argument:[7] OutcomeThe court reversed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings. In a 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Mississippi's abortion law at issue in the case. In a 5-4 vote, the court found there is no constitutional right to abortion and overruled Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (1992). Justice Samuel Alito delivered the court's majority opinion. Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh filed concurring opinions, and Chief Justice John Roberts filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan filed a dissenting opinion.[1] OpinionIn the court's majority opinion, Justice Alito wrote:[1]
ConcurringClarence ThomasJustice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. In his concurrence, Thomas wrote:[1]
Brett KavanaughJustice Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion. In his concurrence, Kavanaugh wrote:[1]
John RobertsChief Justice Roberts filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. In his concurrence, Roberts wrote:[1]
DissentingJustices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan filed a dissenting opinion. In their dissent, the justices wrote:[1]
Text of the opinionRead the full opinion here. Reactions to decisionThe section below contains quotes from election officials and attorneys related to the decision. President Joe Biden (D) said:[8]
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) said:[9]
Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch (R), for whom petitioners attorney Scott Stewart worked, said:[10]
Julie Rikelman, co-attorney for the respondents, said:[11]
AftermathAbortion restrictions enforceable as a result of the decisionSee also: Abortion regulations by stateSeveral media outlets and abortion policy research and advocacy groups published articles and reports about what would happen if Roe were overturned.[12][13][14] According to the Guttmacher Institute and the National Right to Life Committee, as reported by Politifact, 19 states enacted abortion restrictions that would immediately become enforceable if Roe were overturned. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia enacted laws that would keep abortion legal, and 12 states had not enacted laws either keeping abortion legal or restricting access. In three states (Georgia, Iowa, and Ohio), courts had blocked laws restricting abortion access based on Roe.[15] The Guttmacher Institute describes its mission as "advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the United States and globally."[16] The National Right to Life Committee says it "[works] to restore legal protection to the most defenseless members of our society who are threatened by abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide and euthanasia."[17] Results of Roe overturn by stateAbortion restrictions became enforceable in 19 states:
Abortion remained legal in 16 states and the District of Columbia:
Twelve states had not passed laws either restricting abortion or keeping abortion legal:
In three states, courts blocked laws restricting access to abortion based on Roe. With Roe overturned, these restrictions became enforceable:
Effect on federalism
Dobbs affected the federal-state relationship by returning abortion policy decisions to the states. This section describes Dobbs' effect on judicial review and federalism.[3] Abortion policy and judicial review pre-DobbsBefore the Roe v. Wade (1973) decision, states made decisions about abortion policy. The Supreme Court in Roe said the Constitution guaranteed a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment that limited the ability of states to restrict abortion. The decision invalidated state laws that conflicted with the rules laid out in the court's opinion, which generally prohibited states from banning abortion through the second trimester. Roe also established the strict scrutiny standard of review as the proper judicial review framework for analyzing state abortion restrictions. The strict scrutiny standard required that a law restricting abortion be narrowly tailored using what the court considered the least restrictive means available to serve a court-defined compelling government interest.[18][3] Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) concerned a Pennsylvania state law alleged to have violated the abortion rights established under Roe. The court was divided, but the plurality ruled to replace Roe's trimester framework and allow states to prohibit abortion after viability (the point at which fetal life could exist outside of the womb) and regulate abortion before viability to a greater extent. The plurality in Casey also decided the undue burden standard of review, rather than Roe’s strict scrutiny standard of review, was the proper framework for analyzing pre-viability state abortion restrictions. The undue burden standard was less rigorous than strict scrutiny and allowed state governments to regulate abortion as long as state interests were rationally related and did not impose an undue burden on abortion access in the court's opinion.[18][19] Dobbs’ effect on federalism in the context of abortion policyThe Dobbs decision fully overturned Roe and Casey and returned abortion policy decisions to state governments. The court held "that the undue-burden standard was 'not built to last'” and replaced the undue burden standard of review with the rational basis standard of review. The rational basis standard employed was less rigorous than the undue burden standard and the strict scrutiny standard and only required state laws to have "a rational basis on which the legislature could have thought that [a law] would serve legitimate state interests" (emphasis added) to be considered constitutional. The court held that legitimate state interests included "respect for and preservation of prenatal life at all stages of development; the protection of maternal health and safety; the elimination of particularly gruesome or barbaric medical procedures; the preservation of the integrity of the medical profession; the mitigation of fetal pain; and the prevention of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, or disability."[3] Noteworthy eventsDraft majority opinion leaked (2022)On May 2, 2022, Politico reported it obtained a draft majority opinion written in February 2022. According to Politico, the draft was authored by Associate Justice Samuel Alito and would be signed by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.[20] October term 2021-2022See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2021-2022The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 4, 2021. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[21] The court agreed to hear 68 cases during its 2021-2022 term.[22] Four cases were dismissed and one case was removed from the argument calendar.[23] The court issued decisions in 66 cases during its 2021-2022 term. Three cases were decided without argument. Between 2007 and 2021, SCOTUS released opinions in 1,128 cases, averaging 75 cases per year. SCOTUS heard three cases related to abortion during its October 2021 term. Two of those cases (United States v. Texas and Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson) posed questions relating to a Texas abortion law. Arguments in the Texas cases took place in November. The sections below detail the two other cases heard by SCOTUS during this term, including background on the case and the question presented to the court. TexasSee also: Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson and United States v. Texas (2021)These cases questioned the legality of Texas' new abortion law S.B. 8 and whether the federal government had standing to sue the state to block enforcement. The arguments took place on November 1, 2021. SCOTUS agreed to hear the two cases on October 22. Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. United States v. Texas came via direct appeal by the federal government. Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson HIGHLIGHTS
HIGHLIGHTS Additional reading
See alsoExternal links
Footnotes
|