SCOTUS Sidesteps Showdown Over Parental Consent for Abortion

The Supreme Court rejected a case out of Montana that attempted to revive a law requiring parents to give consent for their minor child to get an abortion, according to the Associated Press. 

Voters in Montana have enshrined the right to an abortion in their state constitution, but state leaders argue the decision by the Montana Supreme Court to strike down the law was in violation of parental rights. State attorneys argued in court documents that:

The right that Montana seeks to vindicate here — parents’ right to know about, and participate in, their child’s medical decisions — falls well within the core of parents’ fundamental rights

Planned Parenthood, the organization responsible for getting the law struck down, wrote:

Petitioners seek to use the parental right as a cudgel against a minor’s rights. The broader interests of the child must be accounted for along with parental rights.

They further argued that the state Supreme Court decision already balanced Montanans’ right to an abortion and parental rights, as there still exists a law requiring parents to be notified if their child is receiving an abortion.

Currently, 21 states require parental consent for a minor to receive an abortion. In three of these states, Kansas, Mississippi, and North Dakota, both parents must give consent. Eleven states require at the very least parental notification, and five states require both notification and consent. Parental consent laws have been blocked in two states, including California and New Mexico. 

Both Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Court decided not to take up the case based on technical legalities, rather than an outright rejection of the state’s argument. This means that similar cases could eventually make their way to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court rejected a case out of Montana that attempted to revive a law requiring parents to give consent for their minor child to get an abortion, according to the Associated Press. 

Voters in Montana have enshrined the right to an abortion in their state constitution, but state leaders argue the decision by the Montana Supreme Court to strike down the law was in violation of parental rights. State attorneys argued in court documents that:

The right that Montana seeks to vindicate here — parents’ right to know about, and participate in, their child’s medical decisions — falls well within the core of parents’ fundamental rights

Planned Parenthood, the organization responsible for getting the law struck down, wrote:

Petitioners seek to use the parental right as a cudgel against a minor’s rights. The broader interests of the child must be accounted for along with parental rights.

They further argued that the state Supreme Court decision already balanced Montanans’ right to an abortion and parental rights, as there still exists a law requiring parents to be notified if their child is receiving an abortion.

Currently, 21 states require parental consent for a minor to receive an abortion. In three of these states, Kansas, Mississippi, and North Dakota, both parents must give consent. Eleven states require at the very least parental notification, and five states require both notification and consent. Parental consent laws have been blocked in two states, including California and New Mexico. 

Both Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Court decided not to take up the case based on technical legalities, rather than an outright rejection of the state’s argument. This means that similar cases could eventually make their way to the Supreme Court.