Planned Parenthood v. Carey Term Paper by Nicky

Planned Parenthood v. Carey
An explanation of how 'stare decisis' can be used in a law suit dealing with abortion.
# 128973 | 1,268 words | 2 sources | MLA | 2010 | US
Published on Aug 19, 2010 in Hot Topics (Abortion) , Law (General)

$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now


This paper discusses the battle over abortion that continues to divide the American public in general and the case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) in particular as it represented a direct challenge to five Pennsylvania laws that attempted to restrict women's access to abortion. The paper also explains how 'stare decisis' can be a useful tool of American jurisprudence.

From the Paper:

"Furthermore, the decision in Planned Parenthood v. Carey on the basis of stare decisis avoided injecting the Court any further into the larger political and social debates on the abortion issue. By allowing the prior case as precedent, the justices were, in effect, handing over the entire problem to the legislative branch. In this instance, stare decisis offered a chance to sidestep a contentious choice. Planned Parenthood had wanted the case to be seen as a means of defending the right to an abortion. That right was upheld but only by resort to a previous decision. The court was neither independently affirming the position, nor ruling out other potential challenges. As the Pennsylvania statues were struck down on the spirit of the previous decision, the plurality opinion left open the possibility that other state regulations might be used to limit abortion as long as they did not clearly interfere with the constitutional equal protection clause. The winning side got what it wanted, in part - the continued legality of abortion - but it did not achieve a wider victor in the abortion war. Abortion's opponents were still represented by the dissenting justices. They too, used stare decisis in their opinion, but in a quite opposite fashion, laying open another path to those who might still hope to have abortion removed as a legitimate constitutional right. "

Sample of Sources Used:

  • Dunn, Pintip Hompluem. "How Judges Overrule: Speech Act Theory and the Doctrine of Stare Decisis." Yale Law Journal 113.2 (2003): 493+.
  • Peters, Christopher J. "Foolish Consistency: On Equality, Integrity, and Justice in Stare Decisis." Yale Law Journal 105.8 (1996): 2031-2115.

Cite this Term Paper:

APA Format

Planned Parenthood v. Carey (2010, August 19) Retrieved July 11, 2020, from

MLA Format

"Planned Parenthood v. Carey" 19 August 2010. Web. 11 July. 2020. <>