Stenberg v. Carhart: Poor Interpretivist Analysis, Unreliable Expert Testimony, and the Immportality of the Court's Invalidation of Partial-Birth Abortion Legislation
Loading...
Authors
Mangrum, Richard Collin
Issue Date
2001
Volume
34
Issue
3
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
INTRODUCTION|No issue in the law has been more politicized the last few decades than abortion. Divergent perspectives on abortion fuel political campaigns from the presidential level on down. The abortion question, regardless of political rhetoric to the contrary, provides the first question, if not the litmus test, for Supreme Court nominees from both parties. Any comment by a legislative, judicial, or executive candidate or officer revealing a personal view on the abortion issue typecasts that candidate or officer forever as either pro abortion/pro choice or antiabortion/pro life. The label becomes part of that person's political identity. Whether others will support or criticize that officer or candidate often turns on the fundamental answer to the abortion question. Accordingly, whenever the Supreme Court enters the abortion fray, everyone listens. The Supreme Court's most recent abortion pronouncement in Stenberg v. Carhart, therefore, deserves our attention, if not devotion...
Description
Citation
34 Creighton L. Rev. 549 (2000-2001)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law