Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey
Following the Roe decision, many states attempted to restrict abortions in every way they could. In 1982, the state of Pennsylvania passed the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982, which set provisions for women seeking abortions [1]. There were five provisions that were questioned in this case: informed consent of the woman, informed consent of at least one parent if the woman is a juvenile (judicial by-pass exception), signed statement of notification of husband, a medical emergency trumps all above provisions, and reporting requirements [2]. The District Court in which this case was originially heard held that all provisions were unconstitutional, the Court of Appeals had a split decision, striking down the husband notification provision but upholding the others [3]. The Supreme Court held that women had the right to choose abortion before fetal viability, without an undue interference from the state, which was protected by the Due Process Clause [4]. They redefined "fetal viability" as the ability to breathe, moving the time frame from 28 weeks (as decided in Roe) to 23 to 24 weeks [5]. They also held that states have power/right to restrict abortion after fetal viability, except in health or life risk related cases [6]. They re-establihed the State's legistimate interests in protecting the health of both mother and fetus, which was apart of the Roe decision [7]. In this decision, the Supreme Court decided the husband notification provision was an undue burden standing in the way of a woman seeking an abortion [8].
For many, this decision seemed to bring an end to discussions. In 2008, it was believed that Casey satisfied both sides and allowed both political sides to stabilize [9]. Casey both established legitimacy to the provisions proposed and set boundaries lawmakers would have to follow to constitutionally regulate the procedure [10]. This "satisfication" didn't last very long.