Roe V. Wade Analysis

FACTS: The plaintiffs, five abortion clinics, a class of physicians who provided abortion services, and one physician representing himself independently, challenged provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982 which they argued were unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade, in which it was decided that abortion is a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The provisions challenged were the required informed consent, the 24 hour waiting period prior to the procedure, the requirement that a minor seeking an abortion must obtain consent, and the requirement that a married woman must indicate that she notified her husband of her intention to have an abortion. The District Court held that all of
Wade because it is unnecessary in ensuring that a woman's right to choose not become secondary to the State's interest in protecting the life of the fetus, and therefore, it is not part of the essential holding of Roe v. Wade. In replacement of Roe v. Wade’s “strict scrutiny” analysis, we adopt the “undue burden” analysis, under which the Legislature cannot make a law that is too burdensome or restrictive of one's fundamental rights. Though a woman has the right to choose to terminate her pregnancy before viability, the State should not prohibited from taking steps to ensure that her choice is thoughtful and
This requirement is not considered a substantial obstacle to obtaining an abortion; therefore, there is no undue burden.
The State may not require spousal notification because is likely to prevent many women from obtaining an abortion due to the possibly of spousal abuse. It may impose a substantial obstacle, causing the woman undue burden; therefore, it is invalid.
The State may require a minor to obtain consent from a parent or guardian, or authorization from a court in order to undergo an abortion. A minor may benefit from consultation with their parents prior to undergoing the procedure, as children will often not realize that their parents have their best interests at heart.
The State may require that facilities providing abortion services keep certain records and report certain provisions that are reasonably directed to the preservation of maternal health as long as they properly respect a patient's confidentiality and privacy. The collection of information with respect to actual patients is a vital element of medical research, and the requirement does not impose a substantial obstacle to a woman's