National institute of family and life advocates (NIFLA) : V. Becerra, or the right to be informed about your own reproductive rights.

Vitulia Ivone
{"title":"National institute of family and life advocates (NIFLA) : V. Becerra, or the right to be informed about your own reproductive rights.","authors":"Vitulia Ivone","doi":"10.14718/softpower.2019.6.2.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court has issued its decision in NIFLA v. Becerra, a 5–4 vote holding that the state of California cannot compel pregnancy-resource centers to advertise for the state’s abortion services. This decision represents a considerable victory for both the right to free speech and the conscience rights of pro-life Americans. The case concerned California’s Reproductive FACT Act, which mandated that both licensed and unlicensed women’s-health clinics (crisis-pregnancy or pregnancy-resource centers) not performing abortions had to provide a pre-written notice to clients. Though the law related specifically to abortion, free speech was the fundamental issue at stake. This paper analyzes the history of abortion in US legislation and the perspective of one of its fundamental civil rights.","PeriodicalId":55701,"journal":{"name":"Soft Power Revista EuroAmericana de Teoria e Historia de la Politica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soft Power Revista EuroAmericana de Teoria e Historia de la Politica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14718/softpower.2019.6.2.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Supreme Court has issued its decision in NIFLA v. Becerra, a 5–4 vote holding that the state of California cannot compel pregnancy-resource centers to advertise for the state’s abortion services. This decision represents a considerable victory for both the right to free speech and the conscience rights of pro-life Americans. The case concerned California’s Reproductive FACT Act, which mandated that both licensed and unlicensed women’s-health clinics (crisis-pregnancy or pregnancy-resource centers) not performing abortions had to provide a pre-written notice to clients. Though the law related specifically to abortion, free speech was the fundamental issue at stake. This paper analyzes the history of abortion in US legislation and the perspective of one of its fundamental civil rights.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国家家庭和生命倡导协会(NIFLA): V. Becerra,或被告知自己生殖权利的权利。
美国最高法院以5:4的投票结果公布了NIFLA诉Becerra案的裁决,认为加利福尼亚州不能强迫怀孕资源中心为该州的堕胎服务做广告。这一决定代表了言论自由权和反堕胎美国人良心权利的重大胜利。该案件涉及加州的《生殖事实法案》,该法案规定,有执照和无执照的妇女健康诊所(危机怀孕中心或怀孕资源中心)不进行堕胎手术,必须事先向客户提供书面通知。虽然这项法律专门与堕胎有关,但言论自由是最根本的问题。本文分析了堕胎在美国立法中的历史,并从堕胎的一项基本公民权利的角度进行了分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Verdad y rigorismo de la verdad. Populismo “a la rusa” : una aproximación histórica. The ground trembling under our feet : truth, politics and solitude. Anorexic daughters of hysterical mothers : on the shadows (and lights) of the mother as a symbolic order. About postverità e altri enigmi, by Maurizio Ferraris, Il Mulino, Bologna, 2017.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1