Harris v. McRae
Citations
- 448 U.S. 297
- 100 S. Ct. 2671
- 65 L. Ed. 2d 784
- 1980 U.S. LEXIS 145
About this case
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1980 United States Supreme Court case
Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that states participating in Medicaid are not required to fund medically necessary abortions for which federal reimbursement was unavailable as a result of the Hyde Amendment , which restricted the use of federal funds for abortion.[1] The Court also held that the funding restrictions of the Hyde Amendment did not violate the Fifth Amendment or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment .
Background
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harris_v._McRae&action=edit§ion=1 "Edit section: Background")
]
In 1965, the U.S. Congress amended Title XIX of the Social Security Act to create Medicaid , a voluntary program to provide federal funds to states that choose to provide reimbursement for certain medical expenses for the indigent.[2]
In September 1976, Congress began to ban the use of federal funds to reimburse the cost of abortions under Medicaid.[3] Initially, the only exception was if the life of the mother would be endangered by the fetus being carried to term. The restrictions became known as the Hyde Amendment , after the measure's original sponsor, Illinois Representative Henry Hyde . The language of the 1980 Hyde Amendment provided:
[None] of the funds provided by this joint resolution shall be used to perform abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term; or except for such medical procedures necessary for the victims of rape or incest when such rape or incest has been reported promptly to a law enforcement agency or public health service.[4]
In 1976, after the passage of the original Hyde Amendment, an action was brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York that sought to enjoin enforcement of its restrictions.[5] The plaintiffs were Cora McRae, a New York Medicaid recipient who was in the first trimester of a pregnancy that she wished to abort; the New York City Health and Hospitals Corp., which operated hospitals providing abortion services; officers of the Women's Division of the Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church ; and the Women's Division itself.[6] McRae sought to bring the action as a class action on behalf of other similarly situated women.[6] The District Court granted the class certification motion and permitted US Senators James L. Buckley and Jesse Helms as well as Hyde to intervene as defendants.[6]
The district court granted the injunction on January 15, 1980, and found that the Hyde Amendment violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.[7]
Supreme Court decision
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harris_v._McRae&action=edit§ion=2 "Edit section: Supreme Court decision")
]
Justice Stewart delivered the opinion of the Court in which Chief Justice Burger , Justice White , Justice Powell , and Justice Rehnquist joined. Justice White wrote an opinion concurring the judgment. Justice Brennan wrote a dissent to which Justice Marshall and Justice Blackmun joined. Justice Marshall and Justice Blackmun also wrote separate dissents, and Justice Stevens did so as well.
The Court held that states participating in the Medicaid program were not obligated to fund medically necessary abortions under Title XIX. The Court found that a woman's freedom of choice does not carry with it "a constitutional entitlement to the financial resources to avail herself of the full range of protected choices." The Court ruled that because the Equal Protection Clause is not a source of substantive rights and because poverty does not qualify as a "suspect classification ," the Hyde Amendment does not violate the Fifth Amendment. Finally, the Court held that the coincidence of the funding restrictions of the statute with tenets of the Roman Catholic Church does not constitute an establishment of religion .
See also
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harris_v._McRae&action=edit§ion=3 "Edit section: See also")
]
References
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harris_v._McRae&action=edit§ion=4 "Edit section: References")
]
- ↑ Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980).
- ↑ 448 U.S. at 301.
- ↑ 448 U.S. at 302.
- ↑ Pub. L. 96-123, § 109, 93 Stat. 926
- ↑ McRae v. Mathews, 421 F. Supp. 533 (E.D.N.Y. 1976).
- Jump up to: 1 2 3 448 U.S. at 303.
- ↑ McRae v. Califano, 491 F. Supp. 630 (E.D.N.Y. 1980).
External links
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harris_v._McRae&action=edit§ion=5 "Edit section: External links")
]
- Text of Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Internet Archive (docket files) Justia Library of Congress OpenJurist Oyez (oral argument audio)
United States Fifth Amendment case law
United States Fifth Amendment criminal procedure case law
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harris_v._McRae&oldid=1351931255 "
[United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court](https://en.wikiped
…
Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that government does not infringe a fundamental privacy interest by subsidizing childbirth but not abortion
- holding that the government’s refusal to subsidize the exercise of a constitutional right does not constitute a violation of that right
- holding that a non-profit religious organization lacked associational standing to assert the free exercise rights of its members
- holding that a non-profit religious organization lacked associational standing to assert the free exercise rights of its members
- holding that a free exercise claim requires evidence showing how a particular state practice affects an individual in the practice of their religion
- holding that the government's refusal to subsidize the exercise of a constitutional right does not constitute a violation of that right
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Maeshall, Stewart, Burger, White, Powell, Rehnquist, Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1,169 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court· 1996-06-24· cited 7,493×
- DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social ServicesSupreme Court· 1989-02-22· cited 4,564×
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySupreme Court· 1992-06-29· cited 2,492×
- Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. RomeoSupreme Court· 1982-06-18· cited 2,433×
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court· 1981-04-20· cited 1,660×
- D. S. v. East Porter County School CorpSeventh Circuit· 2015-08-24· cited 1,600×
- Rust v. SullivanSupreme Court· 1991-05-23· cited 1,298×
- Kenneth Jay Wilson v. Lewis Yaklich, United States of America, Intervenor-Appellee. Kenneth Jay Wilson v. Mary SanfordSixth Circuit· 1998-07-27· cited 1,291×
- Bowen v. MassachusettsSupreme Court· 1988-06-29· cited 1,281×
- Alexander v. ChoateSupreme Court· 1985-01-09· cited 1,271×
- Jerardo Rodriguez v. David Cook, Director, Oregon State PenitentiaryNinth Circuit· 1999-02-25· cited 1,073×
- National Federation of Independent Business v. SebeliusSupreme Court· 2012-06-28· cited 1,025×
- M. L. B. v. S. L. J.Supreme Court· 1996-12-16· cited 896×
- Regan v. Taxation With Representation of WashingtonSupreme Court· 1983-05-23· cited 882×
- Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health ClinicSupreme Court· 1993-01-13· cited 871×
- United States v. LeeSupreme Court· 1982-02-23· cited 834×
- Edwards v. AguillardSupreme Court· 1987-06-19· cited 818×
- Bob Jones University v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1983-05-24· cited 803×
- Stormans, Inc. v. SeleckyNinth Circuit· 2009-10-28· cited 752×
- Schweiker v. WilsonSupreme Court· 1981-03-04· cited 721×
Cites
67 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court· 1975-06-25· cited 10,875×
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court· 1970-05-04· cited 5,926×
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court· 1973-01-22· cited 5,581×
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court· 1973-06-25· cited 4,338×
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court· 1965-06-07· cited 4,329×
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court· 1977-06-20· cited 4,065×
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court· 1976-07-01· cited 3,831×
- Brown v. Board of EducationSupreme Court· 1954-05-17· cited 3,819×
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1970-04-20· cited 3,777×
- Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court· 1964-10-12· cited 3,703×
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court· 1973-04-23· cited 3,699×
- O'Shea v. LittletonSupreme Court· 1974-01-15· cited 3,578×
- Washington v. DavisSupreme Court· 1976-06-07· cited 3,450×
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1961-05-29· cited 3,439×
- Meyer v. NebraskaSupreme Court· 1923-06-04· cited 3,363×
- Shapiro v. ThompsonSupreme Court· 1969-04-21· cited 3,119×
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court· 1955-05-09· cited 2,938×
- Sherbert v. VernerSupreme Court· 1963-06-17· cited 2,650×
- Prince v. MassachusettsSupreme Court· 1944-03-27· cited 2,515×
- West Virginia State Board of Education v. BarnetteSupreme Court· 1943-06-14· cited 2,477×
Other cases named Harris v. McRae
4 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.