Question: Are Wisconsin v. Yoder and Planned Parenthood v. Casey both Supreme Court cases?

Context articles: Nancy Northup
Wisconsin v. Michigan
Gonzales v. Carhart
Abortion in Oklahoma
Stenberg v. Carhart
Ernie Preate
Stephen Halbrook
Wisconsin v. Yoder
Stephen Freind
Planned Parenthood v. Casey

Nancy Northup is the President of The Center for Reproductive Rights, in New York City.
 The Center is a reproductive rights organization that uses constitutional and international law to secure women's reproductive freedom including abortion rights in over 45 countries.
 Under her leadership, the Center helped win Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, a Supreme Court case considered the most significant case won by the reproductive rights movement since Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992.
Two Supreme Court cases, Wisconsin v. Michigan, 295 U.S. 455 (1935) and Wisconsin v. Michigan, 297 U.S. 547 (1936), settled a border dispute between Wisconsin and Michigan.
Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), is a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.
 The case reached the high court after U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appealed a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in favor of LeRoy Carhart that struck down the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act.
 Also before the Supreme Court was the consolidated appeal of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which had struck down the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act.
Abortion in Oklahoma is legal under United States law, following the decision in "Roe v. Wade" in 1973.
 In 1992, the Supreme Court case "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" upheld the legality of abortion but granted states permission to create restrictions, so long as they did not create an "undue burden" for women who sought abortion.
Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000), is a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with a Nebraska law which made performing "partial-birth abortion" illegal, without regard for the health of the mother.
 Nebraska physicians who performed the procedure contrary to the law were subject to having their medical licenses revoked.
 The Court struck down the law, finding the Nebraska statute criminalizing "partial birth abortion[s]" violated the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, as interpreted in "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" and "Roe v. Wade".
Ernest D. Preate, Jr. (born November 22, 1940) is a former Republican Pennsylvania Attorney General.
 As Attorney General, he argued before the United States Supreme Court in the landmark case, Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey on behalf of Robert P. Casey, then governor of Pennsylvania.
 Preate also successfully argued another landmark case, Blystone v. Pennsylvania in the United States Supreme Court addressing the death penalty.
Stephen P. Halbrook is a Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute and an author and lawyer known for his litigation on behalf of the National Rifle Association.
 He has written extensively about the original meanings of the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment (the latter as applied to Second Amendment rights).
 He has argued and won three cases before the US Supreme Court: "Printz v. United States", "United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company", and "Castillo v. United States".
 He has also written briefs in many other cases, including the Supreme Court cases "Small v. United States" (pertaining to the Gun Control Act of 1968) and "McDonald v. Chicago".
 In "District of Columbia v. Heller", he wrote a brief on behalf of the majority of both houses of Congress.
 More broadly, his decades of research on the Second Amendment contributed to the intellectual foundation of the "Heller" decision.
 He has written many books and articles on the topic of gun control, some of which have been cited in Supreme Court opinions ("Heller", "McDonald", "Printz v. United States").
 He has testified before congress on multiple occasions.
 Halbrook’s most important scholarly contribution, however, was the book "That Every Man Be Armed", originally published in 1986.
 The book was the most thorough analysis of the legal history and original intent of the Second Amendment.
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), is the case in which the United States Supreme Court found that Amish children could not be placed under compulsory education past 8th grade.
 The parents' fundamental right to freedom of religion was determined to outweigh the state's interest in educating its children.
 The case is often cited as a basis for parents' right to educate their children outside of traditional private or public schools.
Stephen F. Freind (born 1944) is a Republican politician who served in the Pennsylvania General Assembly as the state representative for Delaware County from 1976 until 1993, when he unsuccessfully challenged Arlen Specter in the 1992 Republican primary election.
 He was most notable for authoring a law that was presented as a tort reform measure but was actually designed to restrict abortion rights, that included "requirements that a married woman notify her husband, that there be a 24-hour wait before any abortion, and that doctors show patients a pamphlet with pictures of developing fetuses".
 It was mostly upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States except for the spousal notification provision in the case of "Planned Parenthood v. Casey".
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the constitutionality of several Pennsylvania state statutory provisions regarding abortion was challenged.
 The Court's plurality opinion reaffirmed the central holding of "Roe v. Wade" stating that "matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment."
 The Court's plurality opinion upheld the constitutional right to have an abortion while altering the standard for analyzing restrictions on that right, crafting the "undue burden" standard for abortion restrictions.
 "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" differs from "Roe," however, because under "Roe" the state could not regulate abortions in the first trimester whereas under "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" the state can regulate abortions in the first trimester, or any point before the point of viability, and beyond as long as that regulation does not pose an undue burden on women's fundamental right to an abortion.
 Applying this new standard of review, the Court upheld four regulations and invalidated the requirement of spousal notification.