Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
Page Number: 1.0

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2021 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE 
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL. v. 
JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION ET AL. 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

No. 19–1392.  Argued December 1, 2021—Decided June 24, 2022 

Mississippi’s  Gestational  Age  Act  provides  that  “[e]xcept  in  a  medical
emergency or in the case of a severe fetal abnormality, a person shall
not intentionally or knowingly perform . . . or induce an abortion of an 
unborn human being if the probable gestational age of the unborn hu-
man being has been determined to be greater than fifteen (15) weeks.” 
Miss. Code Ann. §41–41–191.  Respondents—Jackson Women’s Health 
Organization, an abortion clinic, and one of its doctors—challenged the
Act in Federal District Court, alleging that it violated this Court’s prec-
edents establishing a constitutional right to abortion, in particular Roe 
v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113, and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. 
v.  Casey,  505  U. S.  833.    The  District  Court  granted  summary  judg-
ment in favor of respondents and permanently enjoined enforcement 
of the Act, reasoning that Mississippi’s 15-week restriction on abortion 
violates this Court’s cases forbidding States to ban abortion pre-viabil-
ity.  The Fifth Circuit affirmed.  Before this Court, petitioners defend 
the Act on the grounds that Roe and Casey were wrongly decided and
that the Act is constitutional because it satisfies rational-basis review. 

Held: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey
are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the 
people and their elected representatives.  Pp. 8–79.

(a) The  critical  question  is  whether  the  Constitution,  properly  un-
derstood,  confers  a  right  to  obtain  an  abortion.  Casey’s  controlling
opinion  skipped  over  that  question  and  reaffirmed  Roe  solely  on  the
basis of stare decisis.  A proper application of stare decisis, however, 
requires an assessment of the strength of the grounds on which Roe