Constitutional law class 38
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 9

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW CLASS 38 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 42 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW CLASS 38. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION III: ABORTION. Majority Opinion in Roe v. Wade. Written by Justice Blackmun, joined by Justices Burger, Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Powell

Download Presentation

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW CLASS 38

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Constitutional law class 38

CONSTITUTIONAL LAWCLASS 38

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION III: ABORTION


Majority opinion in roe v wade

Majority Opinion in Roe v. Wade

  • Written by Justice Blackmun, joined by Justices Burger, Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Powell

  • 2 dissenters (Justices Rehnquist and White (in Doe v. Bolton)

  • Concurrences by Justice Stewart, Douglas (in Doe v. Bolton) also Burger


Webster v reproductive health services 1989 c p 865

WEBSTER v. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES (1989) [C p. 865]

  • 5-4

  • Plurality by Reh quist, White and Kennedy

  • Concurrence by Scalia

  • Concurrence by O’Connor

  • Dissenters: Blackmun, Brennan, Marshall, Stevens


Planned parenthood of southeastern pa v casey 1992 c p 867

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern PA v. Casey (1992)[C p. 867]

  • Plurality by: O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter (jointly)Concurrence/dissent by: StevensConcurrence/dissent by: BlackmunConcurrence/dissent by: RehnquistJoined by: White, Scalia, ThomasConcurrence/dissent by: ScaliaJoined by: Rehnquist, White, Thomas


Ayotte v planned parenthood of northern new england 2006 supp p 149

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England (2006) [Supp. p. 149]

  • Unanimous

  • Opinion of the Court by O’Connor


Maher v roe 1977 c p 891

Maher v. Roe (1977) [C p. 891]

  • Majority opinion by Powell, joined by Burger, Stewart, White, Rehnquist, Stevens

  • Concurrence by Burger

  • Dissent by Brennan, joined by Marshall and Blackmun

  • Dissent by Marshall

  • Dissent by Blackmun, joined by Brennan and Marshall


Harris v mcrae 1980 c p 893

Harris v. McRae (1980) [C p. 893]

  • Majority by: StewartJoined by: Burger, White, Powell, RehnquistConcurrence by: WhiteDissent by: BrennanJoined by: Marshall, BlackmunDissent by: MarshallDissent by: BlackmunDissent by: Stevens


Stenberg v carhart 2000 c p 879

Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) [C p. 879]

  • Majority by: BreyerJoined by: Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, GinsburgConcurrence by: StevensJoined by: GinsburgConcurrence by: O'ConnorConcurrence by: GinsburgJoined by: StevensDissent by: KennedyJoined by: RehnquistDissent by: ScaliaDissent by: ThomasJoined by: Rehnquist, Scalia


Gonzalez v carhart 2007 supp 133

Gonzalez v. Carhart (2007) [Supp. 133]

  • Majority by: KennedyJoined by: Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, AlitoConcurrence by: ThomasJoined by: ScaliaDissent by: GinsburgJoined by: Stevens, Souter, Breyer


  • Login