Doe v. Bolton

Last updated

Doe v. Bolton
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued December 13, 1971
Reargued October 11, 1972
Decided January 23, 1973
Full case name Mary Doe v. Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General of Georgia, et al.
Citations410 U.S. 179 ( more )
93 S. Ct. 739; 35 L. Ed. 2d 201
Related cases Roe v. Wade
Decision Opinion
Case history
PriorDoe v. Bolton, 319 F. Supp. 1048 (N.D. Ga. 1970)
Questions presented
Whether 26-1201 to 26-1203 of the Georgia Code by limiting the grounds for the performance of abortions deprive women and physicians of their fundamental rights of privacy and liberty in violation of the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution
Holding
The three procedural conditions in 26-1202 (b) of Ga. Criminal Code violate the Fourteenth Amendment. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia affirmed.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William O. Douglas  · William J. Brennan Jr.
Potter Stewart  · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall  · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr.  · William Rehnquist
Case opinions
MajorityBlackmun, joined by Burger, Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Powell
ConcurrenceBurger
ConcurrenceDouglas
ConcurrenceStewart
DissentWhite, joined by Rehnquist
DissentRehnquist
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Amend. XIV;
Ga. Criminal Code § 26-1202 (b)
Superseded by
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)

Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States overturning the abortion law of Georgia. [1] The Supreme Court's decision was released on January 22, 1973, the same day as the decision in the better-known case of Roe v. Wade . [2]

Contents

Background

The Georgia law in question permitted abortion only in cases of rape, severe fetal deformity, or the possibility of severe or fatal injury to the mother. Other restrictions included the requirement that the procedure be approved in writing by three physicians and by a three-member special committee that either (1) continued pregnancy would endanger the pregnant woman's life or "seriously and permanently" injure her health; (2) the fetus would "very likely be born with a grave, permanent and irremediable mental or physical defect"; or (3) the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. [3] [4] In addition, only Georgia residents could receive abortions under this statutory scheme: non-residents could not have an abortion in Georgia under any circumstances.

The plaintiff, a pregnant woman who was given the pseudonym "Mary Doe" in court papers to protect her identity, sued Arthur K. Bolton, then the Attorney General of Georgia, as the official responsible for enforcing the law in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The anonymous plaintiff has since been identified as Sandra Cano, a young mother of three who was nine weeks pregnant at the time the lawsuit was filed. Cano, who died in 2014, described herself as pro-life and claimed her attorney, Margie Pitts Hames, lied to her in order to have a plaintiff. [5] [6]

Hames claimed that Mrs. Doe had a neurochemical disorder which in her opinion and in the opinion of her physician made it inadvisable to continue her pregnancy. The lawyer claimed that the only way to avoid getting pregnant in the future was for Mr. and Mrs. Doe to abstain from sex. This argument described an ongoing harm to the couple's marital satisfaction in order to prevent judges from dismissing the case as moot once Cano gave birth. [7]

On October 14, 1970, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia consisting of Northern District of Georgia Judges Albert John Henderson, Sidney Oslin Smith Jr., and Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Lewis Render Morgan unanimously declared the conditional restrictions portion of the law unconstitutional, though upheld the medical approval and residency requirements. [8] The court also declined to issue an injunction against enforcement of the law, similarly to the district court in the case Roe v. Wade . The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court under a statute, since repealed, permitting bypass of the circuit appeals court.

The oral arguments and re-arguments followed the same schedule as those in Roe. Atlanta attorney Hames represented Doe at the hearings, while Georgia assistant attorney general Dorothy Toth Beasley represented Bolton.

Opinion of the Court

The same 7–2 majority that struck down a Texas abortion law in Roe v. Wade invalidated most of the remaining restrictions of the Georgia abortion law, including the medical approval and residency requirements. The Court reiterated the protected "right to privacy," which applied to matters involving marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education. [3] Justice Harry A. Blackmun wrote the majority opinion for the Court, in which he explained "the sensitive and emotional nature" of the issue and "the deep and seemingly absolute convictions" on both sides. [4] Justice Blackmun went on to conclude that as a constitutional matter, the right to privacy was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." [3] [4]

Together, Doe and Roe declared abortion as a constitutional right and overturned most laws against abortion in other U.S. states. Roe legalized abortion nationwide for approximately the first six months of pregnancy until the point of fetal viability. [3]

Definition of health

The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion until birth, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:

Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

Subsequent developments

Sandra Cano (right) at the 1998 March for Life Master-pnp-ppmsca-61800-61846u.png
Sandra Cano (right) at the 1998 March for Life

The records for Doe concerning Cano were sealed until 1988, when Cano had them unsealed in order to answer questions she had about the case. After abortion rights advocates found out about Cano's legal and political actions, her car was shot at and vandalized with graffiti, [9] and someone shot at her while she was on her front porch holding her baby grandchild. [10]

In 2003, Sandra Cano filed a motion to re-open the case claiming that she had not been aware that the case had been filed on her behalf and that if she had known she would not have supported the litigation. [11] The district court denied her motion, and she appealed. When the appeals court also denied her motion, [12] she requested review by the United States Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court declined to hear Sandra Cano's suit to overturn the ruling. [13] Sandra Cano died on September 30, 2014. [6]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Doe</span> Common placeholder name in English

John Doe (male) and Jane Doe (female) are multiple-use placeholder names that are used in the United States and the United Kingdom when the true name of a person is unknown or is being intentionally concealed. In the context of law enforcement in the United States, such names are often used to refer to a corpse whose identity is unknown or cannot be confirmed. These names are also often used to refer to a hypothetical "everyman" in other contexts, like John Q. Public or "Joe Public". There are many variants to the above names, including John/Jane Roe, John/Jane Smith, John/Jane Bloggs, and Johnie/Janie Doe or just Baby Doe for children.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States generally protected a right to have an abortion. The decision struck down many abortion laws, and caused an ongoing abortion debate in the United States about whether, or to what extent, abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, and what the role of moral and religious views in the political sphere should be. The decision also shaped debate concerning which methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court upheld the right to have an abortion as established by the "essential holding" of Roe v. Wade (1973) and issued as its "key judgment" the restoration of the undue burden standard when evaluating state-imposed restrictions on that right. Both the essential holding of Roe and the key judgment of Casey were overturned by the Supreme Court in 2022, with its landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion in the United States</span> Termination of a pregnancy in the United States

Abortion is a divisive issue in the United States. The issue of abortion is prevalent in American politics and culture wars, though a majority of Americans support continued access to abortion. There are widely different abortion laws depending on state.

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision on upholding a Missouri law that imposed restrictions on the use of state funds, facilities, and employees in performing, assisting with, or counseling an abortion. The Supreme Court in Webster allowed for states to legislate in an aspect that had previously been thought to be forbidden under Roe v. Wade (1973).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sarah Weddington</span> American lawyer and politician (1945–2021)

Sarah Catherine Ragle Weddington was an American attorney, law professor, advocate for women's rights and reproductive health, and member of the Texas House of Representatives. She was best known for representing "Jane Roe" in the landmark Roe v. Wade case before the United States Supreme Court. She also was the first female General Counsel for the US Department of Agriculture.

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, 546 U.S. 320 (2006), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving a facial challenge to New Hampshire's parental notification abortion law. The First Circuit had ruled that the law was unconstitutional and an injunction against its enforcement was proper. The Supreme Court vacated this judgment and remanded the case, but avoided a substantive ruling on the challenged law or a reconsideration of prior Supreme Court abortion precedent. Instead, the Court only addressed the issue of remedy, holding that invalidating a statute in its entirety "is not always necessary or justified, for lower courts may be able to render narrower declaratory and injunctive relief."

Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. The case reached the high court after U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, appealed a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in favor of LeRoy Carhart that struck down the Act. Also before the Supreme Court was the consolidated appeal of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, whose ruling had the same effect as that of the Eighth Circuit.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Linda Coffee</span> American lawyer (born 1942)

Linda Nellene Coffee is an American lawyer living in Dallas, Texas. Coffee is best known, along with Sarah Weddington, for arguing the precedent-setting United States Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade.

Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976), is a United States Supreme Court case on abortion. The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of a Missouri statute regulating abortion. The Court upheld the right to have an abortion, declaring unconstitutional the statute's requirement of prior written consent from a parent or a spouse.

United States v. Vuitch, 402 U.S. 62 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court abortion rights case, which held that the District of Columbia's abortion law banning the practice except when necessary for the health or life of the woman was not unconstitutionally vague.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion law in the United States by state</span> Termination of pregnancy in states of the United States

The legality of abortion in the United States and the various restrictions imposed on the procedure vary significantly depending on the laws of each state or other jurisdiction. Some states prohibit abortion at all stages of pregnancy with few exceptions, others permit it up to a certain point in a woman's pregnancy, while others allow abortion throughout a woman's pregnancy. In states where abortion is legal, several classes of restrictions on the procedure may exist, such as parental consent or notification laws, requirements that patients be shown an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion, mandatory waiting periods, and counseling requirements.

Margie Pitts Hames was an Atlanta civil rights lawyer who argued the abortion rights case Doe v. Bolton before the U.S. Supreme Court.

June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that a Louisiana state law placing hospital-admission requirements on abortion clinics doctors was unconstitutional. The law mirrored a Texas state law that the Court found unconstitutional in 2016 in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (WWH).

Abortion in Georgia is legal up to the detection of an embryonic heartbeat, which typically begins in the 5th or 6th week after the onset of the last menstrual period (LMP) or in two to three weeks after implantation. This law came into force on July 20, 2022, almost a month after the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. ___ (2022) ruling. In 2007, mandatory ultrasound requirements were passed by state legislators. Georgia has continually sought to legislate against abortion at a state level since 2011. The most recent example, 2019's HB 481, sought to make abortion illegal as soon as an embryonic heartbeat can be detected; in most cases that is around the six-week mark of a pregnancy. Many women are not aware they are pregnant at this time. An injunction was issued against this bill by a federal judge, who ruled that it contravened the Supreme Court's 1973 ruling. A poll conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2014 found that 49% of Georgians believed abortions should be illegal in all or most cases vs 48% legal in all or most cases.

As of 2024, abortion is currently illegal in Indiana. It's only legal in cases involving fatal fetal abnormalities, to preserve the life and physical health of the mother, and in cases of rape or incest up to 10 weeks of pregnancy. Previously abortion in Indiana was legal up to 20 weeks; a near-total ban that was scheduled to take effect on August 1 was placed on hold due to further legal challenges, but is set to take place, after the Indiana Supreme Court denied an appeal by the ACLU, and once it certifies a previous ruling, that an abortion ban doesn't violate the state constitution. In the wake of the 2022 Dobbs Supreme Court ruling, abortion in Indiana remained legal despite Indiana lawmakers voting in favor of a near-total abortion ban on August 5, 2022. Governor Eric Holcomb signed this bill into law the same day. The new law became effective on September 15, 2022. But on September 22, 2022, Special Judge Kelsey B. Hanlon of the Monroe County Circuit Court granted a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the ban. Her ruling allows the state's previous abortion law, which allows abortions up to 20 weeks after fertilization with exceptions for rape and incest, to remain in effect.

Abortion in Wisconsin has been legal since September 18, 2023, and is performed in Madison, Milwaukee and Sheboygan through 22 weeks gestation. However, elective abortions in Wisconsin are under dispute after the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 24, 2022. Abortion opponents cite an 1849 law that they claim bans the procedure in all cases except when the life of the mother is in danger. However, lower level courts have argued that the law only applies to infanticide and not consensual abortions. The enforceability of the law is disputed and being considered by the state courts. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin announced that they would resume abortion services in Madison and Milwaukee on September 18, 2023. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin later announced that they would resume abortion services in Sheboygan on December 28, 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sandra Cano (Mary Doe)</span> Plaintiff in the 1973 United States Supreme Court case Doe v. Bolton

Sandra Cano, better known by the legal pseudonym "Mary Doe," was the plaintiff in the lawsuit case Doe v. Bolton (1970), the companion case to Roe v. Wade (1973) which legalized abortion in the United States. Cano held anti-abortion views and claimed she had been manipulated by her lawyer, Margie Pitts Hames. She repeatedly attempted to have the decision overturned. She also undertook anti-abortion activism, with Norma Jane McCorvey among others, and filed a Friend of the Court brief seeking to limit partial birth abortions.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. 215 (2022), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the court held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion. The court's decision overruled both Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), returning to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion not protected by federal statutory law.

Zurawski v. State of Texas is a case currently pending before the Texas Supreme Court regarding medical exceptions to the state's abortion ban. The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights on March 6, 2023. On August 4, 2023, State District Court Judge Jessica Mangrum granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction; the state of Texas appealed this decision to the Texas Supreme Court later that same day. The Texas Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on November 28, 2023.

References

  1. Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973).
  2. Roe v. Wade , 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
  3. 1 2 3 4 Goldstein, Leslie (1994). Contemporary Cases in Women's Rights. Madison: The University of Wisconsin. pp. 16–17.
  4. 1 2 3 Cushman, Clare (2001). Supreme Court Decisions and Women's Rights. Washington D.C.: CQ Press. p. 189.
  5. White, Gayle. "Roe v. Wade Role Just a Page in Rocky Life Story", The Atlanta Journal and Constitution (2003-01-22).
  6. 1 2 Wetzstein, Cheryl (October 1, 2014). "Sandra Cano, the 'Mary Doe' of landmark abortion case, dies". The Washington Times. Retrieved February 1, 2018.
  7. Substantive Due Process by any other name: The Abortion Cases by Richard A. Epstein, The Supreme Court Review 1973, University of Chicago Press, 1974, page 165
  8. Doe v. Bolton, 319F. Supp.1048 ( N.D. Ga. 1970).
  9. Plaintiff in Prominent Abortion Case Reunited with Last Missing Child by Gary L. Carter, Associated Press, December 8, 1989
  10. Extreme Makeover: Women Transformed by Christ Not Conformed to the Culture by Teresa Tomeo, San Francisco, California: Ignatius Press, 2011, page 67
  11. “'Mary Doe' of Doe v. Bolton Files Motion To Overturn Companion Case to Roe v. Wade” Archived September 27, 2007, at the Wayback Machine , Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, (2003-08-27).
  12. Cano v. Baker, 435F.3d1337 ( 11th Cir. 2006).
  13. Mears, Bill. "Court won't rethink 'Mary Doe' abortion case", CNN (2006-10-10).

Written opinions

Oral transcripts

Other media