Question
Respond in a summative manner to the 2 separate posts. Post 1 In your reading it sets forth the pronouncement that the Constitution is the
Respond in a summative manner to the 2 separate posts. Post 1 In your reading it sets forth the pronouncement that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. How does Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey (p 20 of the text) exemplify this pronouncement? Since it establishes the benchmarks by which all other laws are evaluated, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The founders of the Constitution established the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. Although each branch has different functions, they all need to cooperate for the system to work. The legislative branch is responsible for creating laws, the executive branch is in charge of enforcing them, and the judicial branch is in charge of interpreting them (Showalter, 2020). The Supreme Court's ruling in Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey, which holds that restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if they place an "undue burden" on a person seeking an abortion before the fetus is viable, is a prime example of the idea that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. This case allowed women the right to choose an abortion, and did not allow states from making that decision for women (Showalter, 2020). Given the current overturning of Roe v. Wade by the US Supreme Court in the Dobbs V. Jackson case, 1. What are your thoughts regarding precedent and stare decisis? (article in this week's module referencing the US Supreme Court Dobbs case issues and the actual Dobbs case decision) Precedents and stare decisis should continue to be implemented as it provides consistency with the US Constitution. Without this, I think more problems would come up, including people thinking they were being treated unfairly or wondering why a particular case was handled in a different way. Stare decisis guarantees consistency and predictability in the law, enabling people to understand the repercussions of their actions (Showalter, 2020). 2. Do you agree or disagree with the Court's decision in Dobbs, and why? I disagree with the Court's decision in Dobbs ruling because it gave states more authority to restrict and criminalize abortions, tearing away the constitutional rights to privacy and bodily autonomy. The rights of women are violated. States are divided, causing more debates and separation among people. Women should have the freedom to decide whether or not to end a pregnancy under some unanticipated circumstances if doing so would be in both their own and the unborn child's best interests. 3. How do you think the various states will deal with the Dobbs case holding? Dobbs case holding will cause division among many states. Advocates will persist in contesting legislation that prohibits abortion, while Democratic legislators and reproductive rights groups will take action to safeguard the availability of abortion. States will still have the option of allowing abortions or enacting new restrictions on them. I believe this will be a debate for many years to come, with frequent changes along the way. Showalter, Stuart J., (2020). The Law of Healthcare Administration (9th ed.). Health Administration Press.
Post 2 The Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey exemplifies this pronouncement because it shows how powerful the legislature truly is. I believe the Constitution is the supreme law of the land because of how far our country has come and how we still rely on it for our rules and regulations. Without our current leaders having the Constitution as a resource, they would have nothing to look back on. They would not have any resources to make their current decisions. With this case being such a controversial topic, there is obviously going to be two sides. Our text dug into this case by showing how everything began and what was considered the best choice at the time (Showalter 20). Given the current overturning of Roe v. Wade by the US Supreme Court in the Dobbs V. Jackson case, my thoughts regarding precedent and stare decisis lead me to believe they definitely knew what they were doing. They had to have realized they would receive backlash and complaints from the public. I also realize how there will always be people who support the decisions made because it aligns with their beliefs. An article written by the American Bar Association states, "The Supreme Court applies the doctrine of stare decisis by following the rules of its prior decisions unless there is a 'special justification' or, at least, 'strong grounds' to overrule precedent," the CRS report said. Those grounds include society's reliance on precedent, whether the precedent defies practical workability or is a remnant of an abandoned doctrine, and whether it is based upon facts that have changed so significantly that the rule is no longer applicable" (ABA 1). With everything being so legalized, I still believe a lot of this has to do with personal opinion and judgment. I am glad the Constitution exists so they have something to fall back on and reference as they make these crucial decisions. I do not agree with the Court's decision in Dobbs because I feel like they should have stuck to what the Constitution had determined. It is such a touchy subject because everyone is going to have a different view and opinion on the situation. Being where I am at in life, I feel like it would benefit me more and be more true to my beliefs if they had ruled the other way. I think the various states will challenge state abortion bans and point out how the bans violate the state constitution or other state laws. I see them arguing the broad constitutional challenges, health care amendment challenges, and religious freedom challenges. I think abortion is a personal choice and it should be legal. It should not be up to the government to decide whether you can partake in abortion based on where you live.
References: Showalter, J. S., & Sanford, S. T. (2023). The law of healthcare administration. Health Administration Press. With Roe overturned, legal precedent moves to Centerstage. (n.d.). https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2022/06/stare-decisis-takes-centerstage/
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Both posts delve into the significance of legal precedents particularly in light of the Supreme Cour...Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started