Difference between revisions of "Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England"
m (Reverted edits by Gregmiller (Talk) to last version by FernoKlump) |
(improved) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In '''''Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England''''', the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] reversed a lower court ruling against an [[abortion]] parental notification law. The Court ruled that lower courts should not broadly invalidate such a law, and the Court remanded for further review by the lower courts. | + | In '''''Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England''''', the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] reversed a lower court ruling against an [[abortion]] parental notification law, The Parental Notification Prior to Abortion Act, N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 132:24-132:28. The Court ruled that lower courts should not broadly invalidate such a law, and the Court remanded for further review by the lower courts. |
| − | The Court emphasized that "we try not to nullify more of a legislature's work than is necessary, for we know that '[a] ruling of unconstitutionality frustrates the | + | The Court emphasized that "we try not to nullify more of a legislature's work than is necessary, for we know that '[a] ruling of unconstitutionality frustrates the intent of the elected representatives of the people.'" 546 U.S. 320, 326(2006) (quoting ''Regan v. Time, Inc.'', 468 U.S. 641, 652 (1984) (plurality opinion) (brackets in original)). |
| − | intent of the elected representatives of the people.'" | ||
Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]] delivered the opinion of the unanimous court. | Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]] delivered the opinion of the unanimous court. | ||
Revision as of 14:33, August 19, 2011
In Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling against an abortion parental notification law, The Parental Notification Prior to Abortion Act, N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 132:24-132:28. The Court ruled that lower courts should not broadly invalidate such a law, and the Court remanded for further review by the lower courts.
The Court emphasized that "we try not to nullify more of a legislature's work than is necessary, for we know that '[a] ruling of unconstitutionality frustrates the intent of the elected representatives of the people.'" 546 U.S. 320, 326(2006) (quoting Regan v. Time, Inc., 468 U.S. 641, 652 (1984) (plurality opinion) (brackets in original)).
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the opinion of the unanimous court.
External Links
- Case at FindLaw (registration may be required)