American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective (packet)

Compelling state purposes: agree with how sorted out in Griswold, though have some doubt about how sorted out in Roe. Give added weight to the state purpose of protecting potential life. D/n want to delegitimate conception of privacy, so impose the undue burden standard of rev

1. 
   First trimester: no abortion prohibition.
   
2. 
   2^nd & 3^rd trimester: give more wt to potential life than Roe ct, willing to allow more reg as long as the state is not imposing an undue burden on a women’s rt to choose. P. 579
   
   1. 
      Approve: informed consent forms, 24 hour waiting period. Overrules Akron which had struck down this informed consent regulation and similar 24 hr waiting period--NOT undue burden. Parental consent w/ judicial bypass is reaffirmed. P. 582
      
   2. 
      Disapprove: husband consent requirements, continue to believe it is an individual right. D/n overrule Danforth pp. 580-81. Worried about spousal abuse, harm principle, and too much risk to women’s integrity to have to get husband’s approval.
      

Criticism: too uncertain and subject to judicial discretion, removes the bright line. p. 582: Stevens: anti-establishment arg: Roe principle should stand b/c fetal life args are sectarian & religious Blackmun would uphold Roe b/c idea that can conscript women into pregnancy is prob. Equal protection clause should be applied to ensure gender equality of women and restricting abortion would compromise this.

C/n burden rt to marry:

1. 
   Zablocki v. Redhail: equal protection struck down law that person who had to pay child support c/n marry w/out ct approval.
   
2. 
   Turner v. Safly reaffirms marriage rt in prison even when no possibility of sexual relationship.