How this document has been cited
—requiring a minor to show that parental notification is not in her best interests is equivalent to a judicial bypass procedure requiring a minor to show that abortion without notification is in her best interests
- in Planned Parenthood v. Lawall, 2001 and 35 similar citations
The Supreme Court has disapproved the analysis in Glick, in which we held unconstitutional a bypass procedure which allowed a minor to have an abortion if parental notification, and not the abortion itself, was not in the minor's best interests.
- in Planned Parenthood of Southern Arizona v. Lawall, 1999 and 31 similar citations
—finding statute's judicial bypass provision, allowing waiver of notice requirement if notification was not in minor's best interest, sufficient to protect minor's constitutional right to abortion
- in Anspach v. City of Philadelphia, 2007 and 31 similar citations
—upheld Montana's mandatory parental notification law containing a judicial bypass provision when notification is not in the best interests of the minor.
- in Causeway Medical Suite v. Ieyoub, 1997 and 29 similar citations
The Court thereafter has repeatedly "declined to decide whether a parental notification statute must include some sort of bypass provision to be constitutional."
- in Planned Parenthood v. COM'R, IND. DEPT. OF HEALTH, 2017 and 30 similar citations
Such a statute must:(i) allow the minor to bypass the consent requirement if she establishes that she is mature enough and well enough informed to make the abortion decision independently;(ii) allow the minor to bypass the consent requirement if she establishes that the abortion would be in her best interests;(iii) ensure the minor's anonymity; and (iv) provide for …
- in Manning v. Hunt, 1997 and 30 similar citations
—upholding parental notification statute against constitutional challenge to judicial bypass procedure
- in Planned Parenthood of Northern New England v. Heed, 2004 and 19 similar citations
In Bellotti, we struck down a statute requiring a minor to obtain the consent of both parents before having an abortion, subject to a judicial bypass provision
- in DOE BY NEXT FRIEND ROTHERT v. Chapman, 2022 and 18 similar citations
—and the Supreme Court has chastised (and reversed) this court for failing to apply Bellotti II and Akron II faithfully.
- in Planned Parenthood of Idaho, Inc. v. Wasden, 2004 and 17 similar citations
Absent any indication of child maltreatment, providing information to local law enforcement is itself a harm (Dkt. No. 3, at 20).
- in Hopkins v. Jegley, 2017 and 14 similar citations
Cited by
155 F. 3d 352 - Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit 1998
116 F. 3d 707 - Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit 1997
762 A. 2d 620 - NJ: Supreme Court 2000
19 SW 3d 278 - Tex: Supreme Court 2000
180 F. 3d 1022 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1999
448 F. Supp. 2d 1309 - Dist. Court, ND Florida 2006
296 F. Supp. 2d 59 - Dist. Court, D. New Hampshire 2003
189 F. Supp. 2d 975 - Dist. Court, D. Arizona 2001
119 F. 3d 254 - Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit 1997
Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 2019