Citation network
Harris Vs. Mcrae
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 30, 1980
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. 297 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court Harris v. McRaeSearch
-
U.S. 297 (1980) Harris v. McRaeSearch
-
protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment held in Roe v. WadeSearch
-
of abortion and other medical services, encourages alternative activity deemed in the public interest. Cf. Maher v. RoeSearch
-
the Hyde Amendment is not predicated on a constitutionally suspect classification. Maher v. RoeSearch
-
reimbursement for abortions under the standards applicable before the funding restriction had been enacted. McRae v. MathewsSearch
-
services to such women. Id. at 543. The Secretary then brought an appeal to this Court. After deciding Beal v. DoeSearch
-
U. S. 438 , and Maher v. RoeSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the injunction of the District Court and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of those decisions. Califano v. McRaeSearch
-
McRae v. CalifanoSearch
-
Spector Motor Service, Inc. v. McLaughlinSearch
-
construction of the Hyde Amendment was said to find support in the decisions of two Courts of Appeals, Preterm, Inc. v. DukakisSearch
-
F.2d 121 (CA1 1979), and Zbaraz v. QuernSearch
-
King v. SmithSearch
-
whatsoever that Congress intended to shift the entire cost of such services to the participating States. See Zbaraz v. QuernSearch
-
See Preterm, Inc. v. DukakisSearch
-
Accord, Zbaraz v. QuernSearch
-
Hodgson v. BoardSearch
-
Roe v. CaseySearch
-
Mobile v. BoldenSearch
-
protected by the Due Process Clause as recognized in Roe v. WadeSearch
-
Court held in Wade that the statute violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Maher v. RoeSearch
-
the Court was presented with the question whether the scope of personal constitutional freedom recognized in Roe v. WadeSearch
-
U.S. at 432 U. S. 471 . The doctrine of Roe v. WadeSearch
-
id. at 432 U. S. 473 -474, such as the severe criminal sanctions at issue in Roe v. WadeSearch
-
or the absolute requirement of spousal consent for an abortion challenged in Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. DanforthSearch
-
of the Constitution. It cannot be that, because government may not prohibit the use of contraceptives, Griswold v. ConnecticutSearch
-
U. S. 479 , or prevent parents from sending their child to a private school, Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
Public Education v. ReganSearch
-
Everson v. BoardSearch
-
towards abortion as it is an embodiment of the views of any particular religion. 491 F.Supp. at 741. See also Roe v. WadeSearch
-
See McGowan v. MarylandSearch
-
personal stake in the controversy needed to confer standing to raise such a challenge to the Hyde Amendment. See Warth v. SeldinSearch
-
Hunt v. WashingtonSearch
-
Abington School Dist. v. SchemppSearch
-
the principal example of which is a classification based on race, e.g., Brown v. BoardSearch
-
suspect classification. In reaching this conclusion, we again draw guidance from the Court's decision in Maher v. RoeSearch
-
U.S. at 432 U. S. 470 -471, citing San Antonio Independent School Dist. v. RodriguezSearch
-
for this Court has held repeatedly that poverty, standing alone, is not a suspect classification. See, e.g., James v. ValtierraSearch
-
Id. at 410 U. S. 162 -163. See also Beal v. DoeSearch
-
life by Page 448 U. S. 325 encouraging childbirth. 432 U.S. at 432 U. S. 478 -479. See also Poelker v. DoeSearch
-
Williamson v. LeeSearch
-
Optical Co., 348 U. S. 483 , 348 U. S. 488 , quoted in Dandridge v. WilliamsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial