Refocusing the Undue Burden Test: Inconsistent Interpretations Pose a Substantial Obstacle to Constitutional...

Area of Science:

• Legal Studies
• Public Health Policy
• Reproductive Rights

Background:

• Abortion regulation remains a contentious legal and political issue decades after Roe v. Wade.
• Lower courts face challenges in applying the undue burden test to state regulations.
• A circuit split exists regarding the evaluation of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-protocol legislation impacting abortion access.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze Supreme Court jurisprudence on abortion rights.
• To examine the legal framework surrounding FDA-protocol legislation and the existing circuit split.
• To apply the correct undue burden test to FDA-protocol legislation, offering clarity for lower courts.

Main Methods:

• Chronological review of Supreme Court abortion case law.
• Analysis of legal arguments contributing to the circuit split on FDA-protocol legislation.
• Application of the established undue burden standard to FDA-protocol legislation.

Main Results:

• The article clarifies the historical application of the undue burden test in abortion cases.
• It identifies how FDA-protocol legislation creates a specific legal challenge.
• The analysis resolves the circuit split by demonstrating a consistent application of the undue burden test.

Conclusions:

• A clear application of the undue burden test to FDA-protocol legislation provides a path forward.
• This framework offers lower courts a consistent method for evaluating abortion regulations.
• Resolving the circuit split promotes uniformity in abortion rights jurisprudence.