Show simple item record

dc.contributor.editorSchnebly, Risa Ariaen_US
dc.creatorVenkatraman, Richaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-24T23:15:53Zen_US
dc.date.available2021-05-24T23:15:53Zen_US
dc.date.created2021-05-24en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hpsrepository.asu.edu/handle/10776/13268en_US
dc.description.abstractIn Stuart v. Camnitz, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the decision of a North Carolina District Court that declared a controversial ultrasound mandate for abortions unconstitutional in 2014. The ultrasound mandate was a part of the Woman’s Right to Know Act introduced in North Carolina in 2011, which placed several restrictions on abortion care providers in the state. If enforced, the ultrasound mandate would have required physicians to perform an ultrasound on every patient before an abortion and simultaneously describe the resulting image of the fetus regardless of whether the woman wanted to hear the description. The District Court ruled the mandate an unconstitutional violation of physicians’ free speech rights. The Fourth Circuit Court’s decision to affirm the District Court’s ruling established that the state could not compel healthcare providers to recite what the court called state ideology to patients against their medical judgment, which broke with precedent set by prior rulings by the Fifth and Eighth Circuit Courts in similar cases.en_US
dc.format.mediumtext/xhtmlen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherArizona State University. School of Life Sciences. Center for Biology and Society. Embryo Project Encyclopedia.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofEmbryo Project Encyclopediaen_US
dc.rightsCopyright Arizona Board of Regentsen_US
dc.subjectLawen_US
dc.subject.lcshAbortion--Law and legislation--United Statesen_US
dc.subject.lcshAbortion--Law and legislationen_US
dc.subject.lcshFetus--Ultrasonic imagingen_US
dc.subject.lcshFreedom of speechen_US
dc.subject.lcshPerdue, Bev, 1947-en_US
dc.subject.lcshAmerican Civil Liberties Unionen_US
dc.subject.lcshPlanned Parenthood Federation of Americaen_US
dc.subject.lcshEagles, Catherine Caldwell, 1958-en_US
dc.subject.lcshWilkinson, J. Harvie, III, 1944-en_US
dc.subject.lcshFreedom of speech--Law and legislationen_US
dc.subject.lcshFirst amendment casesen_US
dc.subject.lcshUnited States. Constitution. 1st Amendmenten_US
dc.subject.lcshPro-life movementen_US
dc.subject.lcshPro-choice movementen_US
dc.subject.meshWomen's Healthen_US
dc.subject.meshWomen's Rightsen_US
dc.subject.meshAbortion, Induceden_US
dc.subject.meshAbortion Historyen_US
dc.subject.meshAbortion Centersen_US
dc.subject.meshAmbulatory Care Facilitiesen_US
dc.subject.meshInformed Consenten_US
dc.subject.meshReproductive Healthen_US
dc.subject.meshInternational Planned Parenthood Federationen_US
dc.titleStuart v. Camnitz (2014)en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.typeTexten_US
dc.rights.licenseLicensed as Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/en_US
dc.subject.embryoLegalen_US
dc.subject.tagAbortion Lawsen_US
dc.subject.tagRight to free speechen_US
dc.subject.tagWomen's Right to Know Acten_US
dc.description.typeArticlesen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record