Casey Questions

[Mark Tushnet]

One possible answer to the first question is that not all forms of abuse are physical.  Some women might not be able to submit a statement that the male partner would inflict bodily harm, and yet might reasonably fear severe pyschological abuse.

----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Segall <esegall at gsu.edu>
Date: Monday, March 22, 2004 3:54 pm
Subject: Casey Questions

> The statute in Casey required a woman to notify her husband that 
> she was
> going to have an abortion before having one, subject to certain
> exceptions including her providing a statement that she believes such
> notification would cause "him or someone else to inflict bodily harm
> upon her." The Court then invalidated the notification provision 
> on the
> grounds that  because of domestic violence, women may be afraid to
> contact their husbands about their decision. But if they were afraid,
> wouldn't they fall under the exception? Am I missing something? Also,
> and I know this may be controversial (I feel compelled to mention 
> that I
> am pro-choice) but if the state has an interest in the potential of
> human life, doesn't the father of that life also have an interest? I
> know there's a lot about Casey that is more troubling than these
> questions, but any help that might also assist my students would be
> greatly appreciated. 
> 
> Eric Segall
> GSU College of Law
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tushnet.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 247 bytes
Desc: Card for Mark Tushnet <tushnet at law.georgetown.edu>
Url : http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20040322/f55ebc84/tushnet.vcf