Constitutionality of Pennsylvania's Sex-Selective Abortion Ban Post-Dobbs and Its Discriminatory Impact on Asian American Pacific Islander Women
Year: 2024
Type: article
Abstract: Accordingly, this Note will discuss sex-selective abortion bans, specifically Pennsylvania's, and how their discriminatory purpose and impact should be deemed unconstitutional under state law.Part I explains sex-selective abortion bans and their legislative history.It gives an overview of currently enacted bans across the United States, with a greater focus on Pennsylvania's sex-selective abortion ban.Part II addresses how sex-selective abortion bans negatively impact AAPI women, including how AAPI women are subjected to racial profiling by healthcare providers, in addition to increased potential criminal penalties and stigma in the community.Part III examines arguments against sex-selective abortion bans and explains how these bans ultimately fail to discourage sex-selection abortions.The focus of these bans is often on less effective solutions if their goal is truly to minimize gender discrimination.Examples of other less discriminatory options that legislators have chosen to not regulate are given.Part IV offers and analyzes certain policy recommendations for what can be done to challenge the constitutionality of Pennsylvania's sex-selective abortion ban.Among some of the constitutional protections for women against selective abortion bans are the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause and Pennsylvania's Equal Rights Amendment.Last, this Note will analyze the impact of Dobbs specifically on Pennsylvania law. I. UNDERSTANDING SELECTIVE ABORTION BANSUnder the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, women were granted the right to choose an abortion, recognized previously by Roe v. Wade in 1973.3 The right was fully stripped away on June 24, 2022, after the Supreme Court released its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, changing the landscape of women's health.4 The constitutional right to abortion was overturned.5 The majority ruling stated that the decision on abortion rights would be returned to individual states.6 This decision left behind an opening for states to individually attack the vulnerability of women's rights.In just a few months after Dobbs, laws banning abortion have gone into effect in nearly a quarter of states.73 410 U.S. 113, 154 (1973).4 142 S. Ct. 2228, 2240-43 (2022) (holding that since states have historically developed their own abortion regulations independently, Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1972), and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) were inappropriate judicial usurpations of state power).5 Id.
Author: Cindy Hsieh
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: diamond
OpenAlex ID: W4401807384