Dworkin and Casey on Abortion
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6325761 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sarah Stroud (0000-0003-3791-6816, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1996 |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 140-170 |
| Publication date | 1996-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy & Public Affairs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0048-3915 • E-ISSN: 1088-4963 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1088-4963.1996.tb00037.x |
| PMID | 11660187 |
| OpenAlex | W1997213649 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
This article responds to two important recent treatments of abortion rights. I will mainly discuss Ronald Dworkin's recent writings concerning abortion: his article "Unenumerated rights: whether and how Roe should be overruled," and his book Life's Dominion. In these writings Dworkin presents a novel view of what the constitutional and moral argument surronding abortion is really about. Both debates actually turn, he argues, on the question of how to interpret the widely shared idea that human life is sacred. At the heart of the abortion debate is the essentially religious notion that human life has value which transcends its value to any particular person; abortion is therefore at bottom a religious issue. Dworkin hopes to use this analysis to show that the religion clauses of the First Amendment provide a "textual home" for a woman's right to choose abortion. I wish to scrutinize this suggestion here; I want to probe the precise consequences for abortion rights of such an understanding of their basis. I will argue that the consequences are more radical than Dworkin seems to realize. The other work I will examine here is the important 1992 Supreme Court decision on abortion, Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The controlling opinion in that case, written jointly by Justices Kennedy, O'Connor, and Souter, strongly reaffirmed Roe v. Wade, but also upheld most of the provisions of a Pennsylvania statute that had mandated various restrictions on abortion. The justices' basis for upholding these restictions was their introduction of a new constitutional standard for abortion regulations, an apparently weaker standard than those that had governed previous Supreme Court abortion decisions. I think there is a flaw in Casey's new constitutional test for abortion regulations, and I will explain, when we turn to Casey, what it is and why it bears a close relation to Dworkin's reluctance to carry his argument as far as it seems to go
Abortion · Argument (complex analysis · Dominion · Law and economics · Political science · Sociology · Statute · Supreme court · Value (mathematics · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Law · Medicine · Philosophy · Reproductive Health and Contraception · Reproductive Health and Technologies
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,15 |
| Citation span | 1999 - 2007 (9) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |