Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is a significant Supreme Court case concerning abortion rights and regulations. In this case, the Court addressed Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act of 1982, which imposed several requirements on women and their healthcare providers before an abortion could be performed. These requirements included informing women about medical assistance and the risks associated with abortion, as well as stipulations for the presence of multiple physicians during postviable abortions and mandatory reporting of all procedures to the state.
The Supreme Court ultimately ruled against these provisions by a narrow 5-4 margin, concluding that they unconstitutionally infringed on a woman's right to choose. Justice Harry A. Blackmun emphasized that states could not use the guise of maternal health or fetal life to coerce women into continuing pregnancies. This ruling was part of an evolving legal landscape surrounding reproductive rights, setting the stage for future cases, such as Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, which would further test the boundaries of abortion regulations. Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists remains a pivotal moment in the ongoing dialogue about reproductive health rights and legal protections in the United States.
Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Date: June 11, 1986
Citation: 476 U.S. 747
Issue: Abortion
Significance: The Supreme Court struck down a state law containing a number of restrictions on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion, but only five justices continued to use the strict scrutiny test in evaluating the constitutionality of such restrictions.
Pennsylvania’s Abortion Control Act of 1982 had five major requirements: First, women were to be advised of available medical assistance; second, physicians were to inform women of the risks and detrimental effects of abortions; third, abortion providers were to attempt to save the life of a postviable fetus; fourth, two physicians were to be present during the performance of postviable abortions; and fifth, providers were to report all abortions to the state. These regulations were similar to those that the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 margin, had ruled unconstitutional in Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1983).
In Thornburgh, the restrictions were ruled unconstitutional by a 5-4 vote. Justice Harry A. Blackmun, writing for the majority, declared that the states were “not free, under the guise of protecting maternal health or potential life, to intimidate women into continuing pregnancies.” Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, joining the dissenters, criticized the majority for demanding an unrestricted right to abortions. Although not ready to overturn Roe v. Wade (1973), the Court’s majority was moving in the direction of Sandra Day O’Connor’s undue burden test. In the next case devoted to the question, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989), a 5-4 majority upheld a law that was more restrictive than the one overturned in Thornburgh.