Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,797
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + + + + +
expanded
The Equal Protection Clause is invoked by [[abortion]] clinics to try to invalidate laws that treat them differently than legitimate medical services.
The Equal Protection Clause is invoked by [[abortion]] clinics to try to invalidate laws that treat them differently than legitimate medical services.
But the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] has affirmed the authority of a state to prefer childbirth over abortion. Moreover, the Equal Protection Clause imposes an undemanding test with respect to [[facial challenges]] to economic legislation. "[I]f a law neither burdens a fundamental right nor targets a suspect class, we will uphold the legislative classification so long as it bears a rational relation to some legitimate end." ''Romer v. Evans'', 517 U.S. 620, 631 (1996). "By requiring that the classification bear a rational relationship to an independent and legitimate legislative end, we ensure that classifications are not drawn for the purpose of disadvantaging the group burdened by the law." Id. at 633.
Only if a statute is issue "raise[s] the inevitable inference that the disadvantage imposed is born of animosity toward the class of persons affected," would an abortion statute be unconstitutional. In that case the "'desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest.'" ''Id.'' at 634-35 (quoting ''Department of Agriculture v. Moreno'', 413 U.S. 528, 534 (1973)).
[[Category:Law]]
[[Category:Law]]
[[Category:Equal Protection Clause]]
[[Category:Equal Protection Clause]]
[[Category:abortion legal arguments]]
[[Category:abortion legal arguments]]