enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_v._Reproductive...

    Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision on upholding a Missouri law that imposed restrictions on the use of state funds, facilities, and employees in performing, assisting with, or counseling an abortion. [1] The Supreme Court in Webster allowed for states to legislate in an aspect that had ...

  3. Types of abortion restrictions in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_abortion...

    In summary, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas cannot place restrictions on the delivery of abortion services that create an undue burden for women seeking an abortion. In March 2020, the Supreme Court decided in a 5–4 to reverse a lower court's ruling of allowing a Louisiana law to take effect in which abortion clinics required admitting ...

  4. Judicial Vesting Clause - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Vesting_Clause

    The Judicial Vesting Clause (Article III, Section 1, Clause 1) of the United States Constitution bestows the judicial power of the United States federal government to the Supreme Court of the United States and in the inferior courts of the federal judiciary of the United States. [1]

  5. The Supreme Court will rule on limits on a commonly used ...

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-court-rule-limits...

    The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to take up a dispute over a medication used in the most common method of abortion in the United States, its first abortion case since it overturned Roe v.

  6. Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_Woman's_Health_v...

    Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, 579 U.S. 582 (2016), was a landmark decision [1] of the US Supreme Court announced on June 27, 2016. The Court ruled 5–3 that Texas cannot place restrictions on the delivery of abortion services that create an undue burden for women seeking an abortion.

  7. Legal protection of access to abortion - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_protection_of_access...

    It was upheld in full by the Supreme Court of Florida but came before the federal Supreme Court in Madsen v. Women’s Health Center in 1994. The Court upheld the fixed buffer zone, and the noise regulation around clinics and in residential areas, but rejected the floating buffer zone, residential buffer zone, and prohibition against displaying ...

  8. City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Akron_v._Akron...

    The then-current abortion law of Akron, Ohio, which included a 24-hour waiting period and the requirement that a doctor inform the patient of the stage of fetal development, the supposed health risks of abortion, and the availability of adoption and childbirth resources, was unconstitutional. Court membership; Chief Justice Warren E. Burger

  9. Supreme Court's pending abortion ruling: What it may mean - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-courts-pending-abortion...

    The leaked Supreme Court draft opinion overruling Roe vs. Wade set off a political firestorm about the future of abortion. The February draft, written by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., would free ...