---
title: "Planned Parenthood v. Casey"
description: "Roe's 'essential holding' is reaffirmed on stare decisis grounds — women retain the right to pre-viability abortion. The trimester framework is jettisoned. States may regulate abortion throughout pregnancy so long as they do not impose an 'undue burden' — defined as a 'substantial obstacle in the…"
type: "case"
court: "U.S. Supreme Court"
decided: "1992-06-29"
citation: "505 U.S. 833 (1992)"
docket: "91-744, 91-902"
status: "Overruled by Dobbs"
source_url: "https://www.abhortion.org/cases/planned-parenthood-v-casey-1992.html"
---

# Planned Parenthood v. Casey

_Full caption: Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania et al. v. Casey, Governor of Pennsylvania et al._

**Citation:** 505 U.S. 833 (1992) · **Docket No.** 91-744, 91-902

**Status:** Overruled by Dobbs

| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Argued | April 22, 1992 |
| Decided | June 29, 1992 |
| Vote | 5-4 (fractured; joint plurality opinion controlling on core issues) |
| Majority author | O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, JJ. (joint plurality opinion) |
| Joined by | Joined in part by Blackmun and Stevens, JJ., to form majorities on various issues |

## Question presented

Whether Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act provisions — including informed consent, 24-hour waiting period, parental consent, spousal notification, and reporting requirements — are unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade; whether Roe should be overruled.

## Holding

Roe's 'essential holding' is reaffirmed on stare decisis grounds — women retain the right to pre-viability abortion. The trimester framework is jettisoned. States may regulate abortion throughout pregnancy so long as they do not impose an 'undue burden' — defined as a 'substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.' Under this standard, the spousal-notification requirement was struck down; the other provisions were upheld.

## Reasoning

The joint opinion of O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter emphasized stare decisis while replacing Roe's rigid trimester framework with the 'undue burden' standard. The Court's most famous passage articulated a broad theory of personal liberty at 'the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.'

## Opinions

### Majority — O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, JJ. (joint plurality opinion)

_Joined by Joined in part by Blackmun and Stevens, JJ., to form majorities on various issues_

Roe's 'essential holding' is reaffirmed on stare decisis grounds — women retain the right to pre-viability abortion. The trimester framework is jettisoned. States may regulate abortion throughout pregnancy so long as they do not impose an 'undue burden' — defined as a 'substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.' Under this standard, the spousal-notification requirement was struck down; the other provisions were upheld.

### Concurrence — Stevens, J.

_Not joined by any other justice_

Would have retained more of Roe's trimester framework.

### Concurrence — Blackmun, J.

_Not joined by any other justice_

Emotionally reflected on the future of abortion rights: 'I am 83 years old. I cannot remain on this Court forever.'

### Dissent — Rehnquist, C.J.

_Joined by White, Scalia, Thomas, JJ._

Would have overruled Roe. Called the plurality's stare decisis analysis 'a sort of judicial Potemkin Village.'

### Dissent — Scalia, J.

_Joined by Rehnquist, C.J.; White, Thomas, JJ._

Sharply attacked the 'undue burden' standard as 'as doubtful in application as it is unprincipled in origin, hopelessly unworkable in practice, ultimately standardless.' Accused the plurality of installing an 'Imperial Judiciary.'

## Key quotes

> "The essential holding of Roe v. Wade should be retained and once again reaffirmed."
> — Joint opinion (O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, JJ.) · 505 U.S. at 846

> "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."
> — Joint opinion (O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, JJ.) · 505 U.S. at 851

> "A finding of an undue burden is a shorthand for the conclusion that a state regulation has the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus."
> — Joint opinion · 505 U.S. at 877

> "Roe continues to exist, but only in the way a storefront on a western movie set exists: a mere facade to give the illusion of reality."
> — Rehnquist, C.J. (dissenting) · 505 U.S. at 954

> "The Imperial Judiciary lives. It is instructive to compare this Nietzschean vision of us unelected, life-tenured judges — leading a Volk who will be 'tested by following,' and whose very 'belief in themselves' is mystically bound up in their 'understanding' of a Court that 'speak[s] before all others for their constitutional ideals' — with the somewhat more modest role envisioned for these lawyers by the Founders."
> — Scalia, J. (dissenting) · 505 U.S. at 996

> "I am 83 years old. I cannot remain on this Court forever, and when I do step down, the confirmation process for my successor may focus on the issue before us today."
> — Blackmun, J. (concurring in part, dissenting in part) · 505 U.S. at 943

## Practical effect

Roe was preserved on stare decisis but weakened doctrinally. States gained substantial authority to regulate abortion via informed consent, waiting periods, parental involvement, and reporting requirements. Undue burden framework controlled until Dobbs (2022).

## Perspectives

The summaries below are descriptive, not evaluative — an attempt to represent fairly how each camp typically frames this case.

### Abolitionist framing

Abolitionists reject Casey as a compromise decision that preserved a fundamentally wrong ruling (Roe) while creating the 'undue burden' framework that channeled the pro-life movement into decades of incremental regulation. Casey's 'mystery passage' is often cited as exemplifying moral relativism.

### Mainstream pro-life framing

Mainstream pro-life groups viewed Casey as a mixed bag — Roe was upheld, but the undue burden test gave states more room to regulate. Groups like AUL built the incrementalist strategy on Casey's framework.

### Pro-choice framing

Advocates viewed Casey as preserving Roe under stare decisis but warned that the undue burden test would enable creeping restrictions.

## Significance

Controlling abortion doctrine for 30 years (1992-2022) until Dobbs overruled it. Enabled the incrementalist strategy.

| Measure | Score |
| --- | --- |
| Overall significance | 8 / 10 |
| Legal precedential weight | 9 |
| Practical impact on access | 8 |
| Movement relevance (abolitionist) | 8 |
| Enduring relevance, 2026 | 6 |

## Sources

### Primary sources

- [supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/833](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/833/)
- [law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ft…](http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/casey.html)

### Secondary sources

- [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey)

## Related cases

**Cites earlier cases:**

- [Roe v. Wade (1973)](roe-v-wade-1973.md)
- [Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)](griswold-v-connecticut-1965.md)

**Cited by later cases:**

- [Stenberg v. Carhart (2000)](stenberg-v-carhart-2000.md)
- [Gonzales v. Carhart (2007)](gonzales-v-carhart-2007.md)
- [Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016)](whole-womans-health-v-hellerstedt-2016.md)
- [June Medical Services v. Russo (2020)](june-medical-services-v-russo-2020.md)
- [Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)](dobbs-v-jackson-2022.md)

## Notes

The '3-Justice joint opinion' format was unusual and reflected the Court's deep division. The 'mystery of human life' passage was written by Justice Kennedy.