Connection lost
Server error
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court reaffirmed a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion but replaced Roe v. Wade’s trimester framework with a new “undue burden” standard. The Court upheld most of a Pennsylvania law’s restrictions but struck down its spousal notification requirement as an undue burden.
Legal Significance: This case established the “undue burden” test as the new standard for analyzing pre-viability abortion regulations, modifying but not overturning Roe v. Wade. It affirmed the core right to abortion while granting states greater regulatory authority than under Roe’s trimester framework.
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Five abortion clinics and a physician challenged five provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982. The challenged provisions included: (1) an informed consent requirement with a mandatory 24-hour waiting period; (2) a parental consent requirement for minors with a judicial bypass option; (3) a spousal notification requirement for married women; (4) a narrow definition of “medical emergency”; and (5) comprehensive reporting requirements for abortion facilities. The petitioners argued that these provisions violated the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade, which was grounded in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States, as amicus curiae, urged the Supreme Court to overrule Roe. The case presented a direct challenge to the foundational principles of Roe, forcing the Court to reconsider both the substantive right to abortion and the doctrine of stare decisis in the context of a deeply divisive constitutional issue. The lower courts were split, with the Third Circuit upholding all provisions except the spousal notification requirement, creating the basis for the Supreme Court’s review.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a state law imposing informed consent, parental consent, spousal notification, and reporting requirements on abortion access violate the fundamental right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by creating an undue burden on a woman’s choice to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability?
Yes, in part. The Court held that the spousal notification provision was Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu f
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a state law imposing informed consent, parental consent, spousal notification, and reporting requirements on abortion access violate the fundamental right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by creating an undue burden on a woman’s choice to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability?
Conclusion
The case created a significant precedential shift by replacing *Roe's* strict scrutiny Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris n
Legal Rule
A state may not prohibit a woman from making the ultimate decision Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit a
Legal Analysis
The joint opinion by Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter began by reaffirming Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Reaffirms the “essential holding” of Roe v. Wade but discards its