减轻堕胎之痛:胎儿疼痛立法能否经受住立法事实查明的新司法审查?

A. Kolenc
{"title":"减轻堕胎之痛:胎儿疼痛立法能否经受住立法事实查明的新司法审查?","authors":"A. Kolenc","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2206261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fetal Pain laws have been passed in various states and proposed in Congress. These informed consent-type statutes require abortion physicians to provide a pregnant woman seeking an abortion with information explaining the existence of fetal pain and allowing the woman to obtain direct anesthesia for her unborn child. This article argues that such legislation should survive the heightened judicial scrutiny that has been applied to legislative fact-finding. The article focuses on the proposed federal \"Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act of 2005,\" which is similar to most state legislation. It describes the “new” judicial scrutiny of legislative fact-finding and isolates four “deference factors” that courts often use when evaluating these “facts.” The article examines the medical evidence regarding fetal pain and concludes that such legislation should survive judicial scrutiny.","PeriodicalId":387942,"journal":{"name":"Texas Review of Law and Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Easing Abortion's Pain: Can Fetal Pain Legislation Survive the New Judicial Scrutiny of Legislative Fact-Finding?\",\"authors\":\"A. Kolenc\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2206261\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Fetal Pain laws have been passed in various states and proposed in Congress. These informed consent-type statutes require abortion physicians to provide a pregnant woman seeking an abortion with information explaining the existence of fetal pain and allowing the woman to obtain direct anesthesia for her unborn child. This article argues that such legislation should survive the heightened judicial scrutiny that has been applied to legislative fact-finding. The article focuses on the proposed federal \\\"Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act of 2005,\\\" which is similar to most state legislation. It describes the “new” judicial scrutiny of legislative fact-finding and isolates four “deference factors” that courts often use when evaluating these “facts.” The article examines the medical evidence regarding fetal pain and concludes that such legislation should survive judicial scrutiny.\",\"PeriodicalId\":387942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Texas Review of Law and Politics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Texas Review of Law and Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2206261\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Texas Review of Law and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2206261","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

各州已经通过了有关胎儿疼痛的法律,并在国会提出了建议。这些知情同意类型的法规要求堕胎医生向寻求堕胎的孕妇提供解释胎儿疼痛存在的信息,并允许妇女为未出生的孩子获得直接麻醉。本文认为,这种立法应该经受住适用于立法事实调查的高度司法审查。这篇文章的重点是拟议的联邦“2005年未出生婴儿疼痛意识法案”,这与大多数州的立法类似。它描述了立法事实调查的“新”司法审查,并分离了法院在评估这些“事实”时经常使用的四个“尊重因素”。文章审查了有关胎儿疼痛的医学证据,并得出结论认为,这种立法应该经得起司法审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Easing Abortion's Pain: Can Fetal Pain Legislation Survive the New Judicial Scrutiny of Legislative Fact-Finding?
Fetal Pain laws have been passed in various states and proposed in Congress. These informed consent-type statutes require abortion physicians to provide a pregnant woman seeking an abortion with information explaining the existence of fetal pain and allowing the woman to obtain direct anesthesia for her unborn child. This article argues that such legislation should survive the heightened judicial scrutiny that has been applied to legislative fact-finding. The article focuses on the proposed federal "Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act of 2005," which is similar to most state legislation. It describes the “new” judicial scrutiny of legislative fact-finding and isolates four “deference factors” that courts often use when evaluating these “facts.” The article examines the medical evidence regarding fetal pain and concludes that such legislation should survive judicial scrutiny.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Odious Intellectual Company of Authority Restricting Second Amendment Rights to the 'Virtuous' The Constitutionality of DAPA Part II: Faithfully Executing the Law Justice Holmes and Conservatism The Invisible Constitution Is There a Relationship between Guns and Freedom? Comparative Results from 59 Nations
×
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