Hodgson Md’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 2003
1 district · 3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Buckley v. Valeo · Roe v. Wade · Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co · Moore v. City of East Cleveland
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Hodgson group contends that the district court erred in holding that the statute does not violate the equal protection clause. First, they argue that the statute deprives minors who choose abortion of equal protection of the law' because it singles out abortion as the only pregnancy-related medical procedure requiring third-party notification and because the statute impermissibly discriminates between those minors who are able to notify both their parents and those who cannot. The Hodgson group failed to raise the latter challenge at trial, and therefore we need not address it here. Stafford v. Ford Motor Co., 790 F.2d 702, 706 (8th Cir.1986). As to the first issue, a similar challenge was rejected by the Court in Matheson, 450 U.S. at 412-13 , 101 S.Ct. at 1172-73 , and the Court has rejected challenges to abortion statutes based on different treatment in other contexts. Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297, 325 , 100 S.Ct. 2671, 2692 , 65 L.Ed.2d 784 (1980) (abortion funding); Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464, 469-71 , 97 S.Ct. 2376, 2380-81 , 53 L.Ed.2d 484 (1977) (abortion funding); Danforth, 428 U.S. at 66-67 , 96 S.Ct. at 2839-40 (written consent to abortion). Moreover, as discussed in Part I, supra, a state may regulate a minor’s exercise of her constitutional rights in a manner that would not be permissible in the case of an adult. Akron, 462 U.S. at 427 n. 10, 103 S.Ct. at 2491 n. 10. Based on the interests discussed, states may rationally conclude that the decision to have a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The medical, emotional and psychological consequences of an abortion are serious and can be lasting; this is particularly so when the patient is immature.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.