Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health

E387534
U.S. Supreme Court case abortion case constitutional law case

Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down several municipal abortion regulations as unconstitutional infringements on a woman's right to choose.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

All labels observed (2)

Label Occurrences
Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health canonical 1
City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health 1

Statements (48)

Predicate Object
instanceOf U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ
abortion case ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ
areaOfLaw municipal regulation ⓘ
reproductive rights ⓘ
arguedDate 1982-11-30 ⓘ
citation 462 U.S. 416 ⓘ
constitutionalProvision Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form: Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
country United States of America ⓘ
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate 1983-06-15 ⓘ
decisionType majority decision ⓘ
dissentBy Byron R. White ⓘ
Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
surface form: Sandra Day O'Connor

William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
follows Roe v. Wade ⓘ
surface form: Roe v. Wade viability framework
fullName Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health self-linksurface differs ⓘ
surface form: City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health
holding A 24-hour waiting period for abortions was unconstitutional ⓘ
A requirement for disposal of fetal remains in a "humane and sanitary" manner was unconstitutional ⓘ
A requirement that physicians give a state-mandated script discouraging abortion was unconstitutional ⓘ
A requirement that second-trimester abortions be performed in a hospital was unconstitutional ⓘ
Municipal regulations that unduly burden a woman's right to choose abortion prior to fetal viability are unconstitutional ⓘ
Several provisions of the Akron abortion ordinance were unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
impact limited state and local governments' ability to regulate pre-viability abortions ⓘ
joinedByInMajority Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ
John Paul Stevens ⓘ
Thurgood Marshall ⓘ
Warren E. Burger ⓘ
William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ
jurisdiction United States of America ⓘ
surface form: United States
legalIssue abortion regulation ⓘ
right to privacy ⓘ
substantive due process ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ
originatingJurisdiction Akron, Ohio, United States ⓘ
surface form: City of Akron, Ohio
overrules no prior Supreme Court precedent was expressly overruled ⓘ
page 416 ⓘ
petitioner Akron, Ohio, United States ⓘ
surface form: City of Akron, Ohio
precedentFor abortion rights jurisprudence prior to Planned Parenthood v. Casey ⓘ
relatedCase Planned Parenthood v. Casey ⓘ
surface form: Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey

Roe v. Wade ⓘ
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services ⓘ
reporter United States Reports ⓘ
respondent Akron Center for Reproductive Health ⓘ
standardApplied undue burden analysis precursor ⓘ
subsequentTreatment partially limited by Planned Parenthood v. Casey ⓘ
volume 462 ⓘ
year 1983 ⓘ

Referenced by (2)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

91-902 → relatedPrecedent → Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health ⓘ
Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health → fullName → Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health self-linksurface differs ⓘ
this entity surface form: City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health