Document Type
Blog Post
Publication Date
10-31-2022
Graduation Year
2024
Abstract
The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization had a devastating impact on an individual’s right to choose. By holding that there is no constitutional right to abortion, the Court overturned decades of precedent that had protected a person’s bodily autonomy, resulting in negative effects on a pregnant person’s rights. But there were other, less obvious, effects of the decision as well. One of these results is a renewed attention on a minimally discussed law – a law that all fifty states have some version of. This law, commonly known as a safe haven law, was referred to directly by Justice Alito in the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Alito noted that pro-life proponents emphasize that in light of new, modern developments, the right to an abortion is no longer necessary.
This post was originally published on the Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review on October 31, 2022. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above.
Recommended Citation
Foster, Sophia, "Are Safe Haven Laws an Adequate Replacement for Abortion Rights?" (2022). CICLR Online. 57.
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/ciclr-online/57
