Webster v. Reproductive Health Services
| Webster v. Reproductive Health Services | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued April 26, 1989 Decided July 3, 1989 |
|
| Full case name | William L. Webster, Attorney General of Missouri, et al. v. Reproductive Health Services, et al. |
| Citations | 492 U.S. 490 (more)
109 S. Ct. 3040; 106 L. Ed. 2d 410; 57 U.S.L.W. 5023; 1989 U.S. LEXIS 3290
|
| Prior history | Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit |
| Holding | |
| The Missouri law did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist (part II-C), joined by unanimous; White, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy (parts I, II-A, II-B) |
| Plurality | Rehnquist (parts II-D, III), joined by White, Kennedy |
| Concurrence | O'Connor |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Concur/dissent | Blackmun, joined by Brennan, Marshall |
| Concur/dissent | Stevens |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
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 on abortions. 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).
The state of Missouri passed a law which in its preamble stated that "the life of each human being begins at conception", and "unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being."
The statute
The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri struck down the above provisions, and prohibited their enforcement. This decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which ruled that these provisions violated Roe v. Wade and later Supreme Court decisions. William L. Webster, then Missouri Attorney General, appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. It was argued before the Court on April 26, 1989.
The Court overturned the decision of the lower courts, stating that:
Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court for all but Parts II-D and III; however, only Justices White and Kennedy joined that opinion in its entirety. In discussing the fetal viability section, the plurality asserted that the right to abortion was a "liberty interest protected by the Due Process clause" subject to restriction by any laws which would permissibly further a rational state interest such as protecting potential life. The plurality said that this would require the court to "modify and narrow Roe and succeeding cases."
...
Wikipedia