The Casey Standard for Evaluating Facial Attacks on Abortion Statutes

Ford, John Christopher

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 95

First Page: 1443

Year: 1997

Bluebook Citation: 95 MICH. L. REV. 1443 (1997)

Author: John Christopher Ford: all 3 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
1
Citing decision
1
Courts citing
Most recently cited by1

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

Since the Supreme Court declared in 1973 that the Constitution grants women a limited right to an abortion, the Justices have decided abortion cases with reference to such weighty matters as religious freedom, the disadvantaged position of women in society, and the proper role of the judiciary. Understandably, the Supreme Court's writings on abortion deal extensively with these large themes. The Court, and certainly others, view abortion cases as rivaling Brown v. Board of Education in their importance to the nation. While the Court has focused on the big issues, however, it has neglected an equally important, if less emotionally compelling, one: namely, under what circumstances should a statute restricting access to abortion be invalidated "on its face"?

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.