Substantive due process after Gonzales v. Carhart.

Area of Science:

• Law
• Constitutional Law
• Legal History

Background:

• The article evaluates the enduring impact of Washington v. Glucksberg a decade after its issuance.
• It examines the Roberts Court's ruling in Gonzales v. Carhart and Justice Kennedy's jurisprudence on substantive due process.

Purpose of the Study:

• To conduct a doctrinal evaluation of the Glucksberg decision's current standing.
• To assess the validity of the Glucksberg test against the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Main Methods:

• Doctrinal legal analysis.
• Historical interpretation of constitutional law.
• Examination of Supreme Court case law, including Glucksberg, Gonzales v. Carhart, and relevant opinions.

Main Results:

• The Glucksberg decision's framework for substantive due process remains a significant point of discussion.
• Justice Kennedy's views on substantive due process are analyzed in the context of recent Court decisions.
• The article finds the Glucksberg test's focus on rights "deeply rooted in history and tradition" to be constitutionally sound.

Conclusions:

• The Glucksberg test appropriately restricts the recognition of substantive due process rights.
• The original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment supports the Glucksberg standard for identifying fundamental rights.