Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Whole_Woman's_Health_v._Jackson an entity of type: Thing
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, 595 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case brought by Texas abortion providers and abortion rights advocates that challenged the constitutionality of the Texas Heartbeat Act, a law that outlaws abortions after six weeks. The Texas Heartbeat Act prohibits state officials from enforcing the ban but authorizes private individuals to enforce the law by suing anyone who performs, aids, or abets an abortion after six weeks. The law was structured this way to evade pre-enforcement judicial review because lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of state statutes are typically brought against state officials who are charged with enforcing the law, as the state itself cannot be sued under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
rdf:langString
Whole Woman's Health et al. v. Austin Reeve Jackson, Judge, District Court of Texas, 114th District, et al.
xsd:integer
68625218
xsd:integer
1115372362
xsd:integer
21
rdf:langString
Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett; Thomas
<second>
172800.0
rdf:langString
* Motion to dismiss denied, 1:21-cv-00616-RP
* Administrative stay of proceedings granted, 21-50792
* Emergency motion to vacate stay denied, 21-50792
* Application for injunctive relief denied, No. 21A24
* Stay of proceedings granted, 21-50792
rdf:langString
___
xsd:integer
595
xsd:gMonthDay
--11-01
xsd:integer
2021
rdf:langString
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson,
xsd:gMonthDay
--12-10
xsd:integer
2021
rdf:langString
Whole Woman's Health et al. v. Austin Reeve Jackson, Judge, District Court of Texas, 114th District, et al.
rdf:langString
The order of the District Court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded.
rdf:langString
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
rdf:langString
Gorsuch
rdf:langString
Supreme Court
rdf:langString
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, 595 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case brought by Texas abortion providers and abortion rights advocates that challenged the constitutionality of the Texas Heartbeat Act, a law that outlaws abortions after six weeks. The Texas Heartbeat Act prohibits state officials from enforcing the ban but authorizes private individuals to enforce the law by suing anyone who performs, aids, or abets an abortion after six weeks. The law was structured this way to evade pre-enforcement judicial review because lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of state statutes are typically brought against state officials who are charged with enforcing the law, as the state itself cannot be sued under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The case centered on whether a state can insulate its laws from pre-enforcement judicial review in this manner by authorizing private individuals to enforce the law while forbidding public enforcement by state officials. On December 10, 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that abortion providers could not sue state-court judges, court clerks, or the state's Attorney General in an effort to stop the filing of private civil-enforcement lawsuits. The Court also held that the abortion providers' claims against state licensing officials could proceed past the motion-to-dismiss stage.
rdf:langString
Thomas
rdf:langString
Roberts
rdf:langString
Sotomayor
rdf:langString
Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
rdf:langString
Breyer, Kagan
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
37205