Opinion summary
Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion
The case challenged several provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act, which imposed requirements such as informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, parental consent for minors, and spousal notification before an abortion could be performed. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the essential holding of Roe v. Wade that women have a constitutional right to choose to have an abortion but allowed states to impose certain restrictions as long as they do not place an 'undue burden' on the woman seeking an abortion. The decision introduced this new standard and upheld most of Pennsylvania's law except for the spousal notification requirement.
Dissent summary
Etalia.ai summary of the dissenting opinions
Justice Scalia dissented vehemently against both upholding Roe v. Wade and introducing the 'undue burden' standard. He argued that there is no constitutional basis for a right to abortion and criticized what he saw as judicial overreach in creating rights not explicitly stated in the Constitution or its amendments. Scalia contended that decisions regarding abortions should be left entirely to state legislatures rather than federal courts imposing standards like 'undue burden,' which he viewed as vague and subjective.
Opinion of the Court
Decided 29 Jun 1992 · Official report