{"schema":"abhortion.org/case.v1/v1","id":"thornburgh-v-acog-1986","type":"case","case_name_short":"Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists","case_name_full":"Thornburgh, Governor of Pennsylvania v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists","citation":"476 U.S. 747 (1986)","docket_number":"84-495","status":"Superseded","court":"U.S. Supreme Court","date_argued":"1985-11-05","date_decided":"1986-06-11","vote":"5-4","question_presented":"Whether Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act provisions — including informed consent requirements, reporting requirements, and standards for post-viability abortions — violate Roe.","holding":"The challenged Pennsylvania provisions are unconstitutional as inconsistent with Roe.","reasoning_summary":"Justice Blackmun struck down informed consent requirements that included fetal development information, reporting requirements that risked patient anonymity, and post-viability standards deemed too restrictive.","practical_effect":"Pennsylvania's specific provisions invalidated. Chief Justice Burger's dissent — his first calling for reconsidering Roe — signaled shifting court composition.","opinions":[{"role":"majority","author":"Blackmun, J.","joined_by":"Brennan, Marshall, Powell, Stevens, JJ.","summary":"The challenged Pennsylvania provisions are unconstitutional as inconsistent with Roe."},{"role":"concurrence","author":"Stevens, J.","summary":"Emphasized women's privacy and autonomy."},{"role":"dissent","author":"Burger, C.J.","summary":"For the first time, called for reconsidering Roe: 'We should reexamine Roe.'"},{"role":"dissent","author":"White, J.","joined_by":"Rehnquist, J.","summary":"Would have overruled Roe."},{"role":"dissent","author":"O'Connor, J.","joined_by":"Rehnquist, J.","summary":"Applied 'unduly burdensome' analysis."}],"key_quotes":[{"quote":"The Constitution embodies a promise that a certain private sphere of individual liberty will be kept largely beyond the reach of government.","speaker":"Blackmun, J. (majority)","location":"476 U.S. at 772"},{"quote":"In my view, the time has come to reexamine Roe.","speaker":"Burger, C.J. (dissenting)","location":"476 U.S. at 785"}],"perspectives":{"abolitionist":"Not a major abolitionist reference case. Reflects the pre-Casey era of vigorous Roe enforcement.","mainstream_prolife":"Mainstream pro-life groups noted with satisfaction Chief Justice Burger's shift.","prochoice":"Celebrated as one of the last strong reaffirmations of Roe before the Court's composition shifted."},"significance":{"overall":3,"legal_precedential_weight":4,"practical_impact_on_access":3,"movement_relevance_abolitionist":2,"enduring_relevance_2026":1,"rationale":"Superseded by Casey and Dobbs."},"sources":{"primary":[{"name":"supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/747","href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/747/"}]},"related_cases":{"cites_earlier":["Roe v. Wade (1973)","Akron v. Akron Center (1983)"],"cited_by_later":["Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)"]},"links":{"html":"https://www.abhortion.org/cases/thornburgh-v-acog-1986.html","markdown":"https://www.abhortion.org/cases/thornburgh-v-acog-1986.md","json":"https://www.abhortion.org/cases/thornburgh-v-acog-1986.json"}}