Quiz 1: Obergefell and Dobbs Flashcards
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
a. Year [of the decision] (.25 point):
b. What are the core facts of the case? (.5 point):
a. 2022
b. There was a state law in Mississippi that banned most abortions after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Thomas E. Dobbs, a state health officer within the Mississippi State Department. The Health organization was arguing that based on Planned Parenthood v. Casey (which prevented states from banning abortion before fetus viability, generally within 24 weeks) on the basis that a women’s right to choose was protected under the due process clause in the 14th amendment. Mississippi was arguing that the constitution does not provide a right to an abortion
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
What was the constitutional conflict? (i.e. the clash between what act [statute, executive action, etc.], and what clause of the constitution) (.25 point)
a. The Health organization was arguing that based on Planned Parenthood v. Casey (which prevented states from banning abortion before fetus viability, generally within 24 weeks) on the basis that a women’s right to choose was protected under the due process clause in the 14th amendment. So Mississippi’s law banning abortions after 15 weeks violated that. Mississippi was arguing that the constitution does not provide a right to an abortion so there law does not violate something.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
With a short bullet point explanation of what the older precedent said, identify the most important precedent(s)—if any—for what the Court considered in this case. (.5 point)
Roe v. Wade (1973):
Roe v. Wade established the constitutional right to abortion in the United States. The ruling stated that a person’s right to privacy under the 14th Amendment includes the right to have an abortion
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992):
affirmed what it called the central holding of Roe v. Wade: that states may not prohibit abortions before fetal viability, the point when a fetus could survive outside the womb, which is now about 23 weeks
They overturned both of these cases
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
a. What did the court decide (which party won and what was the legal holding)? (.5 point)
b. Who was the author of the lead opinion? (.5 point)
a. Mississippi won, the supreme courts decided that the constitution does not protect the right to abortion.
It overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey and gave the states the authority to individually regulate abortion laws.
b. The author of the lead opinion was Justice Samuel Alito
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Describe the central steps of the reasoning in the majority opinion. (1 point)
the central steps of reasoning were: arguing that the Constitution does not explicitly mention a right to abortion, then establishing that abortion is not “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions,” concluding that the right to abortion is not protected under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, thereby allowing states to regulate or ban abortion
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Identify a notable concurring or dissenting justice, if any, and the most critical disagreement with the majority. If there are multiple, you can make mention of more than one. (.5 point)
In the dissenting opinion Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan:
Reliance on precedent:
The dissent heavily criticized the majority’s decision to overturn established precedent set by Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, arguing that overturning such a significant right without compelling justification undermines the stability of the law.
Substantive due process:
The dissent emphasized that the “liberty” protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right to bodily autonomy, which encompasses the right to abortion.
Impact on women’s equality:
The dissent highlighted how restricting abortion access would disproportionately harm women, particularly those from low-income backgrounds, and significantly impede their ability to participate fully in society.
Historical analysis critique:
The dissent argued that the majority’s historical analysis regarding abortion laws was flawed and did not accurately reflect the societal understanding of women’s rights throughout history.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Why is this case significant? (1 point)
This case is important because it could be used as precedent for overturning other cases that were based on the due process clause such as Obergefell v. Hodges.
Obergefell v. Hodges.
a. Year [of the decision] (.25 point):
b. What are the core facts of the case? (.5 point):
a. 2015
b. Groups of same-sex couples sued their relevant state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee to challenge the constitutionality of those states’ bans on same-sex marriage or refusal to recognize legal same-sex marriages that occurred in jurisdictions that provided for such marriages.
Obergefell v. Hodges:
What was the constitutional conflict? (i.e. the clash between what act [statute, executive action, etc.], and what clause of the constitution) (.25 point
The case was filed by same-sex couples and their supporters who argued that state bans on same-sex marriage violated their rights under the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges:
With a short bullet point explanation of what the older precedent said, identify the most important precedent(s)—if any—for what the Court considered in this case. (.5 point)
The Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges relied on precedents from Loving v. Virginia (This case established that bans on interracial marriage violated due process.) and Griswold v. Connecticut (This case established that the Constitution protects marital privacy). The court also drew on the concept of individual autonomy and the idea that marriage is a fundamental right.
Obergefell v. Hodges:
a. What did the court decide (which party won and what was the legal holding)? (.5 point)
b. Who was the author of the lead opinion? (.5 point)
a. In a 5-4 decision the court ruled that the right to marry is a fundamental right protected by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, so same-sex couples have the same right to marry as opposite-sex couples.
b. Justice Kennedy
Obergefell v. Hodges:
Describe the central steps of the reasoning in the majority opinion. (1 point)
The central steps of the reasoning in the majority opinion is that the right to marry is a fundamental liberty, it safeguards children and families by according legal recognition to building a home and raising children, and it has historically been recognized as improtant. Because there are no differences between a same-sex union and an opposite-sex union with respect to these principles, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the right to marry violates the Due Process Clause and equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges:
Identify a notable concurring or dissenting justice, if any, and the most critical disagreement with the majority. If there are multiple, you can make mention of more than one. (.5 point)
A notable dissenting justice is Chief Justice Roberts dissent. In it he argued that the Constitution does not address same-sex marriage so it is beyond the courts purview to decide for the states whether or not they should recognize it. He argues that this issue should be decided by elected officials, and that the court should not overstep its bounds and participate in judicial policy-making. Roberts also argued that he majority opinion relied on an overly expansive reading of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges:
Why is this case significant? (1 point)
This case is significant because is protects the rights of same-sex couples and Justice Kennedys majority opinion sets the precedent that the court should not simply interpret the constitution by what the founding fathers would have intended it to mean because they did not know the extent of freedom in all its dimension so its the courts job to protect everyones rights and liberties in the current day not just the past. This interpretation could be used to further protect marginalized peoples rights.
