Summary

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Webster v. Reproductive Health Services… (1989)

In Colautti, the Court observed:
Because this point [of viability] may differ with each pregnancy, neither the legislature nor the courts may proclaim one of the elements entering into the ascertainment of viability -- be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor -- as the determinant of when the State has a compelling interest in the life or health of the fetus. Viability is the critical point.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Webster v. Reproductive Health Services… (1989)

I do not think the second sentence of § 188.029, as interpreted by the Court, imposes a degree of state regulation on the medical determination of viability that in any way conflicts with prior decisions of this Court. As the plurality [p528] recognizes, the requirement that, where not imprudent, physicians perform examinations and tests useful to making subsidiary findings to determine viability "promot [es] the State's interest in potential human life, rather than in maternal health."
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Webster v. Reproductive Health Services… (1989)

Quite simply, " [i] t is not the habit of the court to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case." Burton v. United States, 196 U.S. 283, 295 (1905) . The Court today has accepted the State's every interpretation of its abortion statute, and has upheld, under our existing precedents, every provision of that statute which is properly before us. Precisely for this reason, reconsideration of Roe falls not into any "good-cause exception" to this "fundamental rule of judicial restraint.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature