Case Brief


The Supreme Court case upheld the partial-birth abortion ban act of 2003. The main objective of the parties was to implement the partial-birth abortion ban act into practice. The reason why the Supreme Court’s decision upheld congress ban was because of the uncertainty in the medical community over whether the barred procedure is ever necessary to preserve a woman’s health. The theory of litigation, the claims are resolved that arises between the parties by resolving the conflict behavior of the participants.


Gender law and policy touches on every area of life that reaches us all for example employment, family, education, and sexual identity. The theoretical framework from the case of Gonzales V Carhart, 550 US.124 (2007), supports thoughtful and system analysis on the contemporary issues of law and policy based on the to implementation the Partial- Birth Abortion Ban Act into practice. In solving the issues of the Gonzales V Carhart, variety of various perspectives on solving the problem suggests the explanation of the legal terms which deals with the variety of women’s analysis on the practical problem in balancing the legal theory and policy analysis.

The idea came for the variety of the women in these parties is both personally relevant and intellectually rigorous, balancing the legal theory and policy analysis. The Prior Proceedings that were argued by Sternberg V Carhart (2002), Roe V. Wade and Planned Parenthood V. Casey distinguished about the legal sense of the issues in which the court dealt such as the right of women to obtain an abortion.

Case Commentary

From Roe V. Wade, fetal pain legislation, the credit of abortion laws and recognizing of liberty of women over their bodies can only be given to American Journal. In 2005, the unborn child awareness bill was passed in legislation to be an act in the USA. This requires that abortionists disclose to women the reality that killing an unborn baby causes pain to the child.