Page:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization - Court opinion draft, February 2022.pdf/57

This page has been validated.

Cite as: ___ U. S. ___ (20__)

57

Opinion of the Court

They have disagreed about bans on certain dilation and extraction procedures.^[1] They have disagreed about when an increase in the time needed to reach a clinic constitutes an undue burden.^[2] And they have disagreed on whether a state may regulate abortions performed because of the fetus's race, sex, or disability.^[3]

The Courts of Appeals have experienced particular difficulty in applying the large-fraction-of-relevant-cases test. They have criticized the assignment while reaching unpredictable results.^[4] And they have candidly outlined Casey's many other problems.^[5]

973, 985–990 (CA7 2019), certiorari granted, judgment vacated, 591 U. S. __ (2020), and Planned Parenthood v. Miller, 63 F. 3d 1452, 1460 (CA8 1995).

↑ Compare Whole Woman's Health v. Paxton, 10 F.4th, at 435–436, with W. Ala. Women's Ctr. v. Williamson, 900 F. 3d 1310, 1319, 1327 (CA11 2018), and EMW Women's Surgical Ctr., P.S.C. v. Friedlander, 960 F. 3d 785, 806–808 (CA6 2020).
↑ Compare Tucson Woman's Clinic v. Eden, 379 F. 3d 531, 541 (CA9 2004), with Women's Med. Prof'l Corp. v. Baird, 438 F. 3d 595, 605 (CA6 2006) and Greenville Women's Clinic v. Bryant, 222 F. 3d 157, 171–172 (CA4 2000).
↑ Compare Preterm-Cleveland, 994 F. 3d 512, 520–535 (CA6 2021), with Little Rock Family Planning Servs. v. Rutledge, 984 F. 3d 682, 688–690 (CA8 2021).
↑ See, e.g., Bristol Reg'l Women's Center, P.C. v. Slatery, 7 F. 4th 478, 485 (CA6 2021); Reproductive Health Servs. v. Strange, 3 F. 4th 1240, 1269; June Medical Servs., LLC v. Gee, 905 F. 3d 787, 814 (CA5 2020), reversed, 591 U. S. __; Preterm-Cleveland, 994 F. 3d, at 584; Planned Parenthood of Ark. & E. Okla. v. Jegley, 864 F. 3d 953, 958–960 (CA8 2017); McCormack v. Hertzog, 788 F. 3d 1017, 1029–1030 (CA9 2015); compare Newman, 305 F. 3d., at 699 (Coffey, J., concurring), with id., at 708 (Wood, J., dissenting).
↑ See, e.g., Memphis Ctr. for Reproductive Health v. Slatery, 14 F. 4th 409, 451 (CA6 2021) (Thapar, J., concurring in judgment in part and dissenting in part); Preterm-Cleveland, 994 F. 3d, at 524 (CA6 2021); Planned Parenthood of Ind. & Ky., 888 F. 3d, at 313 (Manion, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part); Planned Parenthood of Ind. & Ky., Inc., v. Box, 949 F. 3d 997, 999 (CA7 2019) (Easterbrook,

[2] Compare Whole Woman's Health v. Paxton, 10 F.4th, at 435–436, with W. Ala. Women's Ctr. v. Williamson, 900 F. 3d 1310, 1319, 1327 (CA11 2018), and EMW Women's Surgical Ctr., P.S.C. v. Friedlander, 960 F. 3d 785, 806–808 (CA6 2020).

[3] Compare Tucson Woman's Clinic v. Eden, 379 F. 3d 531, 541 (CA9 2004), with Women's Med. Prof'l Corp. v. Baird, 438 F. 3d 595, 605 (CA6 2006) and Greenville Women's Clinic v. Bryant, 222 F. 3d 157, 171–172 (CA4 2000).

[4] Compare Preterm-Cleveland, 994 F. 3d 512, 520–535 (CA6 2021), with Little Rock Family Planning Servs. v. Rutledge, 984 F. 3d 682, 688–690 (CA8 2021).

[5] See, e.g., Bristol Reg'l Women's Center, P.C. v. Slatery, 7 F. 4th 478, 485 (CA6 2021); Reproductive Health Servs. v. Strange, 3 F. 4th 1240, 1269; June Medical Servs., LLC v. Gee, 905 F. 3d 787, 814 (CA5 2020), reversed, 591 U. S. __; Preterm-Cleveland, 994 F. 3d, at 584; Planned Parenthood of Ark. & E. Okla. v. Jegley, 864 F. 3d 953, 958–960 (CA8 2017); McCormack v. Hertzog, 788 F. 3d 1017, 1029–1030 (CA9 2015); compare Newman, 305 F. 3d., at 699 (Coffey, J., concurring), with id., at 708 (Wood, J., dissenting).

[p57-6] See, e.g., Memphis Ctr. for Reproductive Health v. Slatery, 14 F. 4th 409, 451 (CA6 2021) (Thapar, J., concurring in judgment in part and dissenting in part); Preterm-Cleveland, 994 F. 3d, at 524 (CA6 2021); Planned Parenthood of Ind. & Ky., 888 F. 3d, at 313 (Manion, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part); Planned Parenthood of Ind. & Ky., Inc., v. Box, 949 F. 3d 997, 999 (CA7 2019) (Easterbrook,

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]