Planned Parenthood brought suit challenging the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982 (the Act) in federal court on constitutional grounds. The Act included the following requirements for women seeking an abortion in Pennsylvania: A woman seeking an abortion must give her informed consent prior to the abortion procedure, and she must provide certain information at …Read more

Two groups of petitioners, one pro-life and the other pro-choice, challenged provisions regulating abortion in Article 29(4) of the Health Act, Decree 76/1988. (XI.3.) MT, and its implementing Decree 15/1988. (XII. 15) SZEM. Article 29(4) established that abortion would be permitted in circumstances outlined under the regulations. The implementing regulations in Decree 15/1988 provided that …Read more

The petitioner, Dr. Zsuzsanna Gábor, challenged the constitutionality of Hungary’s law that required women to be married and under forty years of age in order to undergo artificial insemination. The law was challenged on the grounds that it discriminated based on age and marital status, which was prohibited under Article 70 of Hungary’s constitution.

In 1970, Congress enacted Title X of the Public Health Service Act (the Act), which provided federal funding for family planning services. Section 1008 of the Act prohibited the use of Title X federal funding “for programs where abortion [was] a method of family planning.” The Regulations to the Act (the Regulations), introduced by the …Read more

The Appellants brought this case challenging an amendment to the Minors’ Consent to Health Services Act (the Act) on the basis that it violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Subdivision 2 of the Act provided, with certain exceptions, that no abortion shall be performed on a …Read more

The Respondents, including a facility that provides abortions, a physician who performs abortions, and a minor woman who sought an abortion, brought suit challenging the constitutional validity of Ohio’s Amended Substitute House Bill 319, which made it a criminal offence, except in four specified circumstances, for a physician or other person to perform an abortion …Read more

The Appellants, Y.G. and L.G, husband and wife, brought this common law tort claim of an invasion of privacy. At the time of the incident, the wife, L.G., was five months pregnant, bearing triplets conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF) at and under the guidance of the Jewish Hospital of St. Louis (the Hospital). The …Read more

Reproductive Health Services (RHS), a non-profit organization, brought this class action suit challenging the constitutionality of a Missouri law (the Act) regulating the performance of abortions. The Act did the following: Set forth, in the preamble, that the “life of each human being begins at conception,” and that “unborn children have protectable interests in life, …Read more

Eve was a mentally disabled young woman suffering from a condition that made it extremely difficult for her to communicate with others. She was not capable of understanding the consequential relationship between intercourse, pregnancy and birth.  Mrs. E, her mother, was concerned that Eve might innocently become pregnant, which would mean that she, an elderly …Read more

Respondents, including Pennsylvania physicians, abortion counselors and providers, brought this challenge to provisions of Pennsylvania’s Abortion Control Act 1982 (the Act). The Act imposed the following conditions on the provision of abortion services in Pennsylvania: 1.     The informed consent provision (§ 3205) required women to be informed of: The name of the physician performing the …Read more