GUSTE, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF LOUISIANA, et al. v. JACKSON et al.
No. 76-61.
Decided January 17, 1977
Per Curiam.
A Louisiana statute forbids performance of an abortion on a minor without her parents’ consent, or her husband’s consent if she is married. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana enjoined enforcement of the statute. Its decision discusses only these special requirements for abortions on minors, but the injunction appears to extend to the entire statute, and thus includes “informed consent” requirements applicable to all women. We vacate the injunction insofar as it bars enforcement of the “informed consent” requirements, and remand to the District Court so that it may consider the construction of those requirements, their validity in light of this Court’s intervening decision in Planned Parenthood of Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U. S. 52, 65-67 (1976), and their severability from the remainder of the statute.
So ordered.
"Louisiana Rev. Stat. Ann. § 40:1299.33 (D) (Supp. 1976) reads as follows:
“No abortion shall be performed on any woman unless prior to the abortion she shall have been advised, orally and in writing, that she is not required to submit to the abortion and that she may refuse any abortion for any reason and without explanation and that she shall not be deprived of any governmental assistance or any other kind of benefits for refusing to submit to an abortion. This provision shall be of full force and effect notwithstanding the fact that the woman in question is a minor, in which event said minor’s parents or if a minor emancipated by marriage, the minor’s husband, shall also be fully advised of their right to refuse an abortion for the minor in the same manner as the minor is advised. Compliance with this provision shall be evidenced by the written consent of the woman that she submits to the abortion voluntarily and of her own free will, and by written consent of her parents, if she is an unmarried minor, and by consent of her husband if she is a minor emancipated by marriage, such written consent to set forth the written advice given and the written consent and acknowledgment that a full explanation of the abortion procedure to be performed has been given and is understood.”
What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to determine the bases on which the Supreme Court rested its decision with regard to the legal provision that the Court considered in the case. Consider "judicial review (national level)" if the majority determined the constitutionality of some action taken by some unit or official of the federal government, including an interstate compact. Consider "judicial review (state level)" if the majority determined the constitutionality of some action taken by some unit or official of a state or local government. Consider "statutory construction" for cases where the majority interpret a federal statute, treaty, or court rule; if the Court interprets a federal statute governing the powers or jurisdiction of a federal court; if the Court construes a state law as incompatible with a federal law; or if an administrative official interprets a federal statute. Do not consider "statutory construction" where an administrative agency or official acts "pursuant to" a statute, unless the Court interprets the statute to determine if administrative action is proper. Consider "interpretation of administrative regulation or rule, or executive order" if the majority treats federal administrative action in arriving at its decision.Consider "diversity jurisdiction" if the majority said in approximately so many words that under its diversity jurisdiction it is interpreting state law. Consider "federal common law" if the majority indicate that it used a judge-made "doctrine" or "rule; if the Court without more merely specifies the disposition the Court has made of the case and cites one or more of its own previously decided cases unless the citation is qualified by the word "see."; if the case concerns admiralty or maritime law, or some other aspect of the law of nations other than a treaty; if the case concerns the retroactive application of a constitutional provision or a previous decision of the Court; if the case concerns an exclusionary rule, the harmless error rule (though not the statute), the abstention doctrine, comity, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or if the case concerns a "rule" or "doctrine" that is not specified as related to or connected with a constitutional or statutory provision. Consider "Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction" otherwise (i.e., the residual code); for issues pertaining to non-statutorily based Judicial Power topics; for cases arising under the Court's original jurisdiction; in cases in which the Court denied or dismissed the petition for review or where the decision of a lower court is affirmed by a tie vote; or in workers' compensation litigation involving statutory interpretation and, in addition, a discussion of jury determination and/or the sufficiency of the evidence.