{"title":"2003年禁止部分分娩堕胎法案和商业条款","authors":"Allan Ides","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.471441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The constitutional controversy surrounding the recently enacted Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 has focused on whether the Act imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to choose an abortion. More specifically, the question is whether the Act runs afoul of the principles enunciated in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000). The focus of this essay is on a separate constitutional question, namely, whether the Act represents a valid exercise of the commerce power under the principles enunciated in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), and United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000). The author concludes that under current Commerce Clause doctrinal standards the constitutionality of the Act as written is in serious doubt. Since this is a working draft, the author invites comments and criticisms.","PeriodicalId":81001,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional commentary","volume":"20 1","pages":"441-462"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and the Commerce Clause\",\"authors\":\"Allan Ides\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.471441\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The constitutional controversy surrounding the recently enacted Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 has focused on whether the Act imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to choose an abortion. More specifically, the question is whether the Act runs afoul of the principles enunciated in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000). The focus of this essay is on a separate constitutional question, namely, whether the Act represents a valid exercise of the commerce power under the principles enunciated in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), and United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000). The author concludes that under current Commerce Clause doctrinal standards the constitutionality of the Act as written is in serious doubt. Since this is a working draft, the author invites comments and criticisms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Constitutional commentary\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"441-462\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Constitutional commentary\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.471441\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constitutional commentary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.471441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
围绕最近颁布的2003年《部分分娩禁止堕胎法》的宪法争议集中在该法案是否对妇女选择堕胎的权利施加了不适当的负担。更具体地说,问题在于该法案是否违反了Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914(2000)一案所阐明的原则。本文的重点是一个独立的宪法问题,即,根据美国诉洛佩兹案(514 U.S. . 549)(1995)和美国诉莫里森案(529 U.S. . 598)(2000)所阐明的原则,该法案是否代表了商业权力的有效行使。作者的结论是,在现行的商业条款理论标准下,成文法案的合宪性受到严重质疑。由于这是一个工作草案,作者欢迎评论和批评。
The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and the Commerce Clause
The constitutional controversy surrounding the recently enacted Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 has focused on whether the Act imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to choose an abortion. More specifically, the question is whether the Act runs afoul of the principles enunciated in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000). The focus of this essay is on a separate constitutional question, namely, whether the Act represents a valid exercise of the commerce power under the principles enunciated in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), and United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000). The author concludes that under current Commerce Clause doctrinal standards the constitutionality of the Act as written is in serious doubt. Since this is a working draft, the author invites comments and criticisms.