About: Planned Parenthood v. Rounds

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Planned Parenthood v. Rounds Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FPlanned_Parenthood_v._Rounds&invfp=IFP_OFF&sas=SAME_AS_OFF

Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, 686 F.3d 889 (8th Cir. 2012) (en banc), is an Eighth Circuit decision addressing the constitutionality of a South Dakota law which forced doctors to make certain disclosures to patients seeking abortions. The challenged statute required physicians to convey to their abortion-seeking patients a number of state-mandated disclosures, including a statement that abortions caused an "[i]ncreased risk of suicide ideation and suicide." Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, along with its medical director Dr. Carol E. Ball, challenged the South Dakota law, arguing that it violated patients' and physicians' First Amendment free speech rights and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. After several appeals and remands, the Eighth Circuit, sitting

Attributes	Values
rdfs:label	Planned Parenthood v. Rounds (en)
rdfs:comment	Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, 686 F.3d 889 (8th Cir. 2012) (en banc), is an Eighth Circuit decision addressing the constitutionality of a South Dakota law which forced doctors to make certain disclosures to patients seeking abortions. The challenged statute required physicians to convey to their abortion-seeking patients a number of state-mandated disclosures, including a statement that abortions caused an "[i]ncreased risk of suicide ideation and suicide." Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, along with its medical director Dr. Carol E. Ball, challenged the South Dakota law, arguing that it violated patients' and physicians' First Amendment free speech rights and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. After several appeals and remands, the Eighth Circuit, sitting (en)
foaf:depiction
dcterms:subject	2012 in South Dakota United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit cases 2012 in United States case law Planned Parenthood litigation United States abortion case law
Wikipage page ID	62882234 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1110881483 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Roe v. Wade Roger Leland Wollman Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists En banc F. Supp. 2d Bobby Shepherd United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit United States District Court for the District of South Dakota 2012 in South Dakota Due Process Clause Due process Injunction Undue burden standard Constitution of the United States United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit cases Freedom of speech Crisis pregnancy center Statistical significance Steven Colloton Compelled speech Third-party standing 2012 in United States case law William J. Riley Dissenting opinion June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists American Psychological Association Duane Benton First Amendment to the United States Constitution Food and Drug Administration Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Forced abortion Statutory construction Remand (court procedure) James B. Loken Kermit Edward Bye Lavenski Smith Supreme Court of the United States Diana E. Murphy Domestic violence Planned Parenthood litigation United States abortion case law Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood v. Casey Michael Joseph Melloy Mike Rounds National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra Raymond Gruender Vagueness doctrine Preliminary injunction Facial challenge Compelling State Interest Summary judgment Vacated judgment Mifeprex Injunctive relief Sequela Marty J. Jackley F.3d
Link from a Wikipage to an external page	https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/805052/planned-parenthood-minnesota-v-mike-rounds/ https://www.leagle.com/decision/20051256375fsupp2d88111172 https://www.leagle.com/decision/20081254530f3d72411181 https://www.leagle.com/decision/inadvfco120206000119 https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20110902084 https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20120724142 https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20100208442 http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/08/06/053093P.pdf http://www.harvardlawreview.org/media/pdf/vol126_planned_parenthood.pdf https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case%3Fcase=2291245345910357190 http://verdict.justia.com/2012/08/20/can-the-government-require-doctors-to-provide-misleading-information-to-patients-seeking-abortions
sameAs	Planned Parenthood v. Rounds Planned Parenthood v. Rounds Planned Parenthood v. Rounds
SubmitDate	0001-01-09 (xsd:gMonthDay)
SubmitYear	2012 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Dead_link dbt:Reflist dbt:Infobox_U.S._Courts_of_Appeals_case
thumbnail	wiki-commons:Special:FilePath/US-CourtOfAppeals-8thCircuit-Seal.png?width=300
Dissent	Murphy (en)
JoinDissent	Wollman, Bye, Melloy (en)
JoinMajority	Riley, Loken, Smith, Benton, Shepherd (en)
LawsApplied	First Amendment to the United States Constitution Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Prior	25920.0 (second)
case	25920.0 (second)
citations	25920.0 (second)
court	United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
courtlistener	https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/805052/planned-parenthood-minnesota-v-mike-rounds/

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 52 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software