The Essential Holding of Casey: Rethinking Viability

J. Randy Beck, University of Georgia School of Law

Article comments

UMKC Law Review, Vol. 75, No. 3 (Spring 2007), pp. 713-740

Abstract

The Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey plurality acknowledged an obligation to "justify the lines we draw." The corollary would seem to be an obligation to eschew lines that defy principled justification. In the decades since Roe v. Wade, the Court has offered no adequate rationale for the viability standard, notwithstanding persistent judicial and academic critiques. Exacerbating this country's divisions over abortion and placing us out of step with the world community, the viability rule seems a strong candidate for abandonment as the Court continues to rethink its abortion jurisprudence in the aftermath of Casey.