Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) - US Supreme Court Cases Series | Academy 4 Social Change

In a plurality opinion by Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, the Court reaffirmed the decision in Roe, but allowed some new restrictions to go into effect. They established an “undue burden” standard for evaluating whether a law violated the right to an abortion. In the Pennsylvania Law, the justices decided that only the requirement that a married woman obtain her husband’s consent met this new “undue burden” standard. This decision also placed the point at which abortion could be regulated at fetal viability, or when the fetus could potentially survive outside the womb.

**Find a transcript, lesson plans, worksheets, and more at: https://academy4sc.org/video/planned-...

**Think Further Questions
1. Do you agree or disagree with the undue burden standard set in this case? What are some potential positives and negatives of using this as a legal precedent?
2. Why do you think the justices decided that only the spousal consent requirement posed an “undue burden”? Do you think any of the other restrictions should have met this standard?
3. Do you think the decision in this case strengthened or weakened the Roe v Wade decision? Did it help clarify abortion law or make it more vague?

**Contents
00:00 - Case
01:14 - Decision
01:59 - Dissent
02:22 - Impact

#academy4sc #civicseducation #supremecourt