Gonzales v. Carhart
United States Supreme Court
550 U.S. 124, 127 S. Ct. 1610, 167 L. Ed. 2d 480 (2007)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
In November 2003, President Bush signed into law the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (PBABA). The PBABA prohibited intact dilation and evacuation (intact D&E), a particular manner of ending fetal life in the second trimester whereby a surgeon killed the fetus by dilating the mother’s cervix, piercing the fetus’s skull with scissors, and using suction to extract the fetus from the uterus. When Congress passed the PBABA in 2003, more than 30 states had laws prohibiting the procedure. Dr. Leroy Carhart (plaintiff), a physician who performed intact D&E, brought suit in federal district court against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (defendant) seeking to enjoin the PBABA from taking effect. Carhart argued that the PBABA was unconstitutionally overbroad and lacked a health exception for partial-birth abortions necessary to protect the health of the mother. The district court ruled for Carhart and held the PBABA unconstitutional. The court of appeals affirmed, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)
Concurrence (Thomas, J.)
Dissent (Ginsburg, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
