Gonzales v. Carhart
**Gonzales v. Carhart Overview**
Gonzales v. Carhart is a significant Supreme Court case decided in 2007, which upheld the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, marking a critical moment in the ongoing national debate over abortion rights in the United States. The case arose after the law was challenged by several courts, which previously ruled it unconstitutional due to its vague language and absence of an exception for the health of the mother, as established in the prior Stenberg v. Carhart decision. This ruling represented the first federal restriction on abortion procedures since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973.
The majority opinion, delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy, did not directly address the previous Stenberg ruling but instead emphasized the specificity of the federal legislation and its minimal exceptions for circumstances threatening a woman's life. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) opposed the ban, arguing it interfered with the doctor-patient relationship and limited medical care options. The decision indicated a notable shift in the Supreme Court's stance on abortion, suggesting an increase in government involvement in reproductive health decisions and reflecting broader implications for women's rights and medical autonomy. The ruling has sparked ongoing discussions and activism from both pro-choice and pro-life advocates, highlighting the polarized views surrounding abortion in American society.
On this Page
Gonzales v. Carhart
The Case: US Supreme Court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003
Date: Decided on April 18, 2007
Indicating a shift in its stance on abortion and women’s rights, the Supreme Court upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, refuting claims that the law placed “undue burden” on women. Many in the medical profession saw the court’s decision as opening the door to government involvement in the health decisions of Americans.
In 2003, US Congress passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (PBA ban), the first federal restriction on an abortion procedure since the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in 1973. Just three years prior to the Act’s passing, the Supreme Court struck down a similar ban in Nebraska in Stenberg v. Carhart (2000), citing the state law’s vague terms and lack of an exception for women’s health. Based on the Stenberg ruling, two courts of appeals declared the 2003 PBA ban unconstitutional on the same grounds. In response to lower courts’ striking down the ban, US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appealed. Challenging the rulings by the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth and Ninth Circuits, Gonzales claimed the constitutionality of the ban. As the appeals were similar, the Supreme Court’s decision in Gonzales v. Carhart (which appealed the Eighth Circuit’s opinion) also served as a response to Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood (which appealed the Ninth Circuit’s opinion).
During the hearing, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) filed an amicus brief stating its opposition to the PBA ban. The brief warned against government interference in the doctor/patient relationship, and emphasized the safety advantages of partial-birth abortion, or intact dilation and evacuation, over non-intact dilation and evacuation, in which the fetus is pulled apart within the uterus to allow for its removal. According to the ACOG, the law limits doctors in their ability to provide care.
Despite the precedent set by the Stenberg ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the PBA Ban Act. Anthony Kennedy, delivering the majority opinion, neither refuted nor supported the Court’s previous decision in Stenberg, as the cases referenced separate bans on partial-birth abortions. Rather, the Supreme Court relied on the federal legislation’s specificity, as well as its minimal exceptions for women whose lives were at risk, to deem the ban constitutional.
Impact
Gonzales indicated a shift in the Supreme Court’s stance on abortion, with critics also seeing it as a shift away from science. Of the five justices in the majority, all were Catholic. Some believe the categorical Catholic opposition to abortion on religious grounds significantly influenced the ruling. By upholding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and confirming that fetal life is a state interest, the Supreme Court validated a degree of congressional authority over the medical decisions of pregnant women.
Bibliography
“ACOG Statement on the US Supreme Court Decision Upholding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.” American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Amer. Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 18 Apr. 2007. Web. 6 Sep. 2012.
Harrison, Maureen, and Steve Gilbert, eds. Landmark Decisions of the United States Supreme Court VII, 2000–2005. Carlsbad: Excellent, 2006. Print.
Leverich, Jean, ed. Abortion. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2010. Print.