|
|
Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pa. v. Casey, 510 U.S. 1309 (1994)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pa. v. Casey, 510 U.S. 1309 (1994)
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey No. 93-1503 Decided February 7, 1994 510 U.S. 1309
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY OF MANDATE
Syllabus
The application for a stay of the Court of Appeals’ mandate allowing enforcement of Pennsylvania’s Abortion Control Act, pending the filing of a petition for certiorari is denied. The applicants are correct that, if it is proven that the Act would have the effect that applicants allege, enforcement of the Act’s pertinent provisions may interpose a substantial obstacle to the exercise of the right to reproductive freedom guaranteed by the Due Process Clause and affirmed in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833. However, there is no reasonable probability that this Court will grant review and no fair prospect that the applicants will ultimately prevail on the merits. The Court of Appeals’ decision -- that the District Court erred in reopening the record in the facial constitutional challenge to the Act and continuing its injunction against enforcement of various provisions -- does not represent such an arguable departure from this Court’s mandate in Casey as to warrant discretionary review or an award of the relief applicants seek. This Court did not remand Casey to the lower courts for application of the proper legal standard, but undertook to apply the standard to the statute, upholding the constitutionality of most of its provisions. None of Casey’s five opinions took the position that the District Court record was inadequate in a way that would counsel leaving those judgments to the District Court in the first instance. In addition, it was at least unusual for the District Court to enjoin enforcement of the statute on a showing of "plausible likelihood" of success.
Contents:
Chicago:
U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pa. v. Casey, 510 U.S. 1309 (1994) in 510 U.S. 1309 Original Sources, accessed July 1, 2025, http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=PIHBBGV83M8UY58.
MLA:
U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pa. v. Casey, 510 U.S. 1309 (1994), in 510 U.S. 1309, Original Sources. 1 Jul. 2025. http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=PIHBBGV83M8UY58.
Harvard:
U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pa. v. Casey, 510 U.S. 1309 (1994). cited in 1994, 510 U.S. 1309. Original Sources, retrieved 1 July 2025, from http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=PIHBBGV83M8UY58.
|