 Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Seven years earlier the Court had ruled a similar state law unconstitutional in Stenberg v. Carhart.
|
| Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) |
|
In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court found that medical privacy was constitutionally protected regarding reproductive decisions. The Griswold decision helped set precedent for the decision in Roe v. Wade.
|
| Hoyt v. Florida (1961) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether laws like that of Florida, which allowed women to be exempt from serving on juries unless they specifically registered to do so, were constitutional. Gwendolyn Hoyt alleged that because there were no women on her jury, she was not given a fair trial. The Court decided that because women were given an opportunity to register to be considered for jury duty, the law was constitutional.
|
| Hyde Amendment (1976) |
|
The Hyde Amendment, first appearing as part of an appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor, and Health, Education, and Welfare, prevents federal funds from being spent on abortion care. Versions of the Hyde Amendment continue to be adopted by Congress each year, though exceptions have been added to allow for the termination of pregnancies that result from rape or incest or that endanger the life of the mother.
|
| In the Matter of Julia alias Mary Ann on Habeas Corpus (1836) |
|
In 1834, Julia successfully filed a freedom suit in St. Louis. Two years later, her mother, having secured her own freedom, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of Julia, claiming that she was still being held by her former enslavers. When Julia was presented to the court, the writ was discharged, the court "being satisfied that she is contented with her situation, and does not wish to exchange it."
|
| In the Matter of the Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Elizabeth Bird (1867) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Elizabeth Bird shows legal challenges related to child custody in the nineteenth century. In this case, Bird argued that she was made the legal guardian of Missouri Bird, a ten year old child, by the child's mother, and claimed that Missouri was being confined to the house of Frances Pattmore. Pattmore responded that Missouri's presence in her house was of her own free will. The court awarded custody of Missouri to Pattmore.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Agnes Smith for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1921) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Agnes Smith shows legal challenges on the part of women in the early twentieth century from carceral confinement. After she was committed to an institute for "feeble-minded youth," Agnes' parents attempted to regain custody of her. The court denied the writ, claiming that Agnes was a "fit and proper subject" for the institution.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Alice McKay for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for the Body of Mary McKay (1891) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Alice McKay shows legal challenges related to child custody in the nineteenth century. In this case, a mother petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus after placing one of her children with a charitable organization to receive medical care and custody of the child was eventually given to a married couple. Before a court order was made in the case, the mother abducted the child from the married couple's home. Custody of the child was awarded by the court to the married couple.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Gussie Burns for Writ of Habeas Corpus (1920) |
|
In this case, Gussie Burns was arrested for vagrancy, found guilty, and sentenced to 30 days in the county jail. After her sentencing, she was subjected to a physical examination and reportedly found to have venereal disease. As a result, she was sent to the Omaha Women's Detention Home for treatment. After being confined to the home for four months, Gussie petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that her 30 day sentence had long since passed, the disease she was alleged to have did not exist, and that officials would not release her until she consented to "an operation for the removal of certain tubes." A writ was granted, though the outcome of her case is unknown. Cases like Gussie's illustrate the legal sophistication of women in the face of attempts to subordinate them during the Progressive Era.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Mary Marshall, mother of William Marshall an Infant, for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1886) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Mary Marshall shows legal challenges related to carceral confinement and child custody in the nineteenth century. After being abandoned by her husband, a mother and her three children were forced to enter a charitable home. When one child became ill, he was given to the custody of a physician. The court ruled that custody of the child was lawful, but that in six months time, the mother could petition to amend or modify the judge's order.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition of William M. Parkinson for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1852) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of William M. Parkinson shows legal challenges related to child custody in the nineteenth century. In this case, a father used habeas corpus in an attempt to retrieve his nine-year-old son from his ex-wife and her new husband. The child's fate is unknown.
|
| Julia, alias Mary Ann v. Robert Duncan (1834) |
|
This freedom suit was brought on behalf of Julia, a child under the age of 21 who was unlawfully enslaved in St. Louis by the man who sold her free mother into slavery in Louisiana. Although the court granted Julia her freedom, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by her mother two years later shows that Julia was still being held by her enslaver.
|
| Mann Act (1910) |
|
The Mann Act was a federal law that focused on interstate sex trafficking, specifically of white women. The act was responsible for the targeting of inter-racial couples by law enforcement.
|
| Martin v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1805) |
|
The Martin case set precedent that women were the same legal person as their husbands. The case itself was brought by James Martin in an attempt to recover his Loyalist mother's property which had been confiscated by the post-Revolutionary government of Massachusetts when she and her husband fled during the war. The court in this case ruled that because Anna Martin had not intended to forfeit her land but had been forced to leave with her husband as required by the marital law of coverture, her property could not be confiscated.
|
| Miscarriage (1867) |
|
The Illinois state statute regarding miscarriage reflects the diverse landscape of abortion law in the nineteenth century. This law punished individuals for helping pregnant women obtain a miscarriage.
|
| Nebraska Abortion Statute (1873) |
|
The Nebraska state statute regarding abortion reflects the diverse landscape of abortion law in the nineteenth century. This lengthy law punished individuals for helping pregnant women obtain a miscarriage.
|
| Nebraska Abortion Statute (1929) |
|
This Nebraska state statute regarding abortion reflects the diverse landscape of abortion law before Roe v. Wade. This law punished individuals for helping pregnant women obtain a miscarriage.
|
| Nebraska Civil Rights Initiative (2008) |
|
This amendment to the Nebraska Constitution banned the use of affirmative action in the "operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." It was initiated as a ballot measure that was approved in 2008.
|
| Nebraska Vagrancy Law (1881) |
|
Vagrancy acts passed by the Nebraska state legislature reflected race-neutral legal language that was used to target the poor, people of color, and women.
|
| Nebraska Vagrancy Law (1929) |
|
Vagrancy acts passed by the Nebraska state legislature reflected race-neutral legal language that was used to target the poor, people of color, and women.
|
| New Jersey Constitutional Franchise Provision (1776) |
|
This provision of the first New Jersey Constitution did not limit franchise by race or gender, allowing unmarried women and free people of color who could meet the property requirement to vote. When New Jersey rewrote its constitution in 1844, it explicitly denied women and African Americans the right to vote.
|
| New Jersey Disfranchisement Statute (1807) |
|
This New Jersey statute explicitly banned women and free people from color from voting, after these groups had been enfranchised since 1776. When New Jersey rewrote its constitution in 1844, it explicitly denied women and African Americans the right to vote.
|
| New Jersey Franchise Statute (1797) |
|
This New Jersey statute explicitly added women to their voting laws, while also allowing free people of color to vote. When New Jersey rewrote its constitution in 1844, it explicitly denied women and African Americans the right to vote.
|
| Page Act (1875) |
|
The Page Act was a federal law that profiled Chinese and other women immigrating from Asian countries as immoral, barring them from entering the United States.
|
| People v. Belous (1969) |
|
This is a case before the California Supreme Court looking at abortion rights. It focused on a physician's ability to practice medicine unimpeded and the extent of physicians' abilities to determine when an abortion would be necessary to protect a woman's life.
|