Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization: 2022

In 2018, Mississippi passed the Gestational Age Act, prohibiting abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of medical emergency or severe fetal abnormality. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the only abortion clinic in Mississippi, and one of its doctors challenged the Act, arguing that it violated the constitutional right to abortion established by Roe v. Wade (1973) and reaffirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992). 

The Federal District Court ruled in favor of Jackson Women’s Health, permanently blocking the Act’s enforcement on the grounds that it violated the Supreme Court’s precedents, which protected a woman’s right to choose an abortion before viability. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision. Mississippi then appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that Roe and Casey were wrongly decided and that the Act should be upheld under a rational-basis review. 

The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions were unconstitutional. In a landmark decision, the Court ruled that they were not. The majority opinion declared that the Constitution does not reference abortion and that no constitutional provision implicitly protects the right to abortion. The Court overruled Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, concluding that these decisions were not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition nor implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. 

The Court argued that the principles of stare decisis, which advocate for the respect of precedent, did not compel the continued acceptance of Roe and Casey. The justices stated that Roe had usurped the power to address a profound moral and social issue that should be left to the people and their elected representatives. They also criticized the reasoning in Roe as exceptionally weak and noted that courts could not establish precise lines regarding permissible restrictions on abortion. 

This decision marked a significant shift in American jurisprudence, allowing states greater authority to regulate abortion and emphasizing the role of democratic processes in resolving contentious moral and social issues. The ruling underscored the state’s legitimate interest in protecting the life of the unborn, fundamentally altering the legal landscape sur