Citation network
Roe Vs. Wade
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 22, 1973
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 113 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. WadeSearch
-
U.S. 113 (1973) Roe v. WadeSearch
-
protected right not assertable as a defense against the good faith state prosecutions pending against him. Samuels v. MackellSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court. This Texas federal appeal and its Georgia companion, Doe v. BoltonSearch
-
over the centuries. We bear in mind, too, Mr. Justice Holmes' admonition in his now-vindicated dissent in Lochner v. NewSearch
-
of Appeals with respect to the granting of the plaintiffs' prayer for declaratory relief. Our decisions in Mitchell v. DonovanSearch
-
U. S. 427 (1970), and Gunn v. UniversitySearch
-
from specific denial of injunctive relief, and the arguments as to both aspects are necessarily identical. See Carter v. JurySearch
-
Florida Lime Growers v. JacobsenSearch
-
S. 80 -81 (1960). It would be destructive of time and energy for all concerned were we to rule otherwise. Cf. Doe v. BoltonSearch
-
U. S. 83 , 392 U. S. 101 (1968), and Sierra Club v. MortonSearch
-
a pregnant single woman thwarted by the Texas criminal abortion laws, had standing to challenge those statutes. Abele v. MarkleSearch
-
Crossen v. BreckenridgeSearch
-
Poe v. MenghiniSearch
-
F.Supp. 986, 990-991 (Kan.1972). See Truax v. RaichSearch
-
U.S. at 392 U. S. 102 , and the necessary degree of contentiousness, Golden v. ZwicklerSearch
-
exist at stages of appellate or certiorari review, and not simply at the date the action is initiated. United States v. MunsingwearSearch
-
SEC v. MedicalSearch
-
U. S. 498 , 219 U. S. 515 (1911). See Moore v. OgilvieSearch
-
Carroll v. PrincessSearch
-
The State of Texas v. PageSearch
-
U. S. 126 James H. Hallford, No. C-69-5307-IH, and (2) The State of Texas vs. JamesSearch
-
to assert only the latter for standing purposes here. We see no merit in that distinction. Our decision in Samuels v. MackellSearch
-
grant injunctive relief to the doctor. The reasons supportive of that action, however, are those expressed in Samuels v. MackellSearch
-
supra, and in Younger v. PageSearch
-
and Byrne v. KaraleisSearch
-
U. S. 216 (1971). See also Dombrowski v. PfisterSearch
-
say that the bare allegation of so indirect an injury is sufficient to present an actual case or controversy. Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
Abele v. MarkleSearch
-
falls far short of those resolved otherwise in the cases that the Does urge upon us, namely, Investment Co. Institute v. CampSearch
-
Data Processing Service v. CampSearch
-
Page 410 U. S. 129 and Epperson v. ArkansasSearch
-
U. S. 97 (1968). See also Truax v. RaichSearch
-
in this litigation. Their complaint was properly dismissed by the District Court, and we affirm that dismissal. v. TheSearch
-
marital, familial, and sexual privacy said to be protected by the Bill of Rights or its penumbras, see Griswold v. ConnecticutSearch
-
or among those rights reserved to the people by the Ninth Amendment, Griswold v. ConnecticutSearch
-
Although the Oath is not mentioned in any of the principal briefs in this case or in Doe v. BoltonSearch
-
A seemingly notable development in the English law was the case of Rex v. BourneSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial