1992- Planned Parenthood v. Casey

This court case entailed the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act and its provisions, which hindered the fundamental right to an abortion from women and thus was overturned due to the rulings of Roe v. Wade. According to the Embryo Project Encyclopedia by Sheridan Seward from Arizona State University, “the four provisions included spousal notification, information disclosure, a twenty-four-hour waiting period, and parental consent for minors” . These provisions were thus challenged by Kathryn Kobert, who represented Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri. She challenged the rules within the case because the rules violated a woman’s safety and the rulings of Roe v. Wade which emphasized the fundamental right to an abortion. Without the fundamental right to an abortion, women would seek dangerous alternatives to induce abortions which could threaten a women’s life and her health (Seward). The idea is then of an “undue burden”, which, according to Seward, “ is present if the purpose is to impose obstacles that prevent a woman from obtaining an abortion before the fetus is viable”. The court presented the details of the rulings of Roe v. Wade, which were mostly reaffirmed, and the idea of an “undue burden” was added to the decision. This decision implemented viability over trimester framework, which was emphasized in Roe v. Wade. Thus the right to have an abortion was upheld again (Seward).