Ad
related to: civil court cases in pennsylvania supreme court abortion leak newscourtrec.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Commonwealth Court dismissed the lawsuit in 2021, citing a state Supreme Court case from 1985 that upheld the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act. The law dates to 1982 and bans abortion care ...
Although the U.S. Supreme Court took away federal abortion rights in 2022, states can guarantee rights to their citizens beyond those set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
In 1977, NPR's Nina Totenberg reported that by a 5–3 vote, the Court declined to review cases of three defendants in Watergate cases. [8] [13] Two years later, Chief Justice Warren Burger reassigned a member of the Court's print staff after determining they leaked the results of multiple cases to Tim O’Brien, an ABC News correspondent.
A wave of state-level anti-abortion laws that followed the Supreme Court’s 2022 ... a leak of the Supreme Court’s draft opinion was published and after court rulings in 2023 took aim at the ...
Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S. 379 (1979), was a United States Supreme Court abortion rights case, which held void for vagueness part of Pennsylvania's 1974 Abortion Control Act. The section in question was the following:
The Supreme Court in the 2016 case Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt clarified what the 'undue burden' test requires: "Casey requires courts to consider the burdens a law imposes on abortion access together with the benefits those laws confer." [27] [28] The Supreme Court further clarified in the 2020 June Medical Services
The draft opinion reported by Politico sends a signal that the Supreme Court is ready to toss out abortion rights, legal experts said. Legal experts express shock at rare Supreme Court leak on ...
Within hours of the news of the leak, both pro-abortion rights protesters and pro-life counterprotesters gathered outside the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere in the U.S. [120] The response to the draft put unusual public pressure on the Court as it made its decision in the case. [121]