Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) changed the standard for evaluating abortion restrictions to what?

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) changed the standard for evaluating abortion restrictions to what?

• A. Strict scrutiny for all restrictions
• B. Undue burden standard
• C. Rational basis review
• D. Clear and present danger test

Answer: (B)

The key idea is how abortion restrictions are reviewed after Roe v. Wade. Planned Parenthood v. Casey replaced the strict-scrutiny style approach with the undue burden standard. Under this rule, before fetal viability a law is unconstitutional only if it places a substantial obstacle in a woman’s path to obtaining an abortion. Regulations that do not create such an obstacle may be allowed, even if they impose some burden, so long as they do not amount to an undue burden. This approach balances state interests in protecting health and potential life with a woman’s constitutional right, by focusing on the practical impact of the restriction rather than applying strict scrutiny to every abortion regulation. That’s why the undue burden standard is the correct description.

The key idea is how abortion restrictions are reviewed after Roe v. Wade. Planned Parenthood v. Casey replaced the strict-scrutiny style approach with the undue burden standard. Under this rule, before fetal viability a law is unconstitutional only if it places a substantial obstacle in a woman’s path to obtaining an abortion. Regulations that do not create such an obstacle may be allowed, even if they impose some burden, so long as they do not amount to an undue burden. This approach balances state interests in protecting health and potential life with a woman’s constitutional right, by focusing on the practical impact of the restriction rather than applying strict scrutiny to every abortion regulation. That’s why the undue burden standard is the correct description.