Poe v. Ullman case summary
367 U.S. 497, 81 S. Ct. 1752, 6 L. Ed. 2d 989, 1961 U.S.
Constitutional Law
PROCEDURAL HISTORY: Plaintiffs, doctor and patients, sought review of the order from the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut, which ruled that Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 53-32, 54-196 (1958), prohibiting the use of contraceptive devices, was applicable to married couples.
FACTS:
-The patients and doctor challenged the constitutionality under U.S. Const. amend. XIV, the state statute prohibiting the use of contraceptive devices and the giving of medical advice in the use of such devices, Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 53-32, 54-196 (1958).
HOLDING:
-The state supreme court held that the statutes were applicable to married couples even under a claim that conception would constitute a serious threat to the health or life of the female spouse.
ANALYSIS:
-On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the mere existence of a state penal statute constituted insufficient grounds to support a federal court's adjudication of its constitutionality in proceedings brought against the state's prosecuting officials if real threat of enforcement was wanting.
-Prosecutors in the state had not prosecuted anyone for violation of the statute, and the patients and the doctor were not in any danger of immediately sustaining some direct injury as the result of its enforcement.
-The Court dismissed the action.
CONCLUSION: The court dismissed the plaintiffs', patients and doctor, claim challenging the constitutionality of statutes prohibiting the use of contraceptive devices.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
367 U.S. 497, 81 S. Ct. 1752, 6 L. Ed. 2d 989, 1961 U.S.
Constitutional Law
PROCEDURAL HISTORY: Plaintiffs, doctor and patients, sought review of the order from the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut, which ruled that Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 53-32, 54-196 (1958), prohibiting the use of contraceptive devices, was applicable to married couples.
FACTS:
-The patients and doctor challenged the constitutionality under U.S. Const. amend. XIV, the state statute prohibiting the use of contraceptive devices and the giving of medical advice in the use of such devices, Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 53-32, 54-196 (1958).
HOLDING:
-The state supreme court held that the statutes were applicable to married couples even under a claim that conception would constitute a serious threat to the health or life of the female spouse.
ANALYSIS:
-On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the mere existence of a state penal statute constituted insufficient grounds to support a federal court's adjudication of its constitutionality in proceedings brought against the state's prosecuting officials if real threat of enforcement was wanting.
-Prosecutors in the state had not prosecuted anyone for violation of the statute, and the patients and the doctor were not in any danger of immediately sustaining some direct injury as the result of its enforcement.
-The Court dismissed the action.
CONCLUSION: The court dismissed the plaintiffs', patients and doctor, claim challenging the constitutionality of statutes prohibiting the use of contraceptive devices.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment