《美国联邦制与州堕胎政策制定:限制生育权利的政策与扩张》

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
M. Mayer, John C. Morris, J. Aistrup, R. B. Anderson, Robert C. Kenter
{"title":"《美国联邦制与州堕胎政策制定:限制生育权利的政策与扩张》","authors":"M. Mayer, John C. Morris, J. Aistrup, R. B. Anderson, Robert C. Kenter","doi":"10.1093/publius/pjad012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturning Roe v. Wade shifted abortion-policy decision-making from the national level to the state level and opened the door for states to individually determine the level of protection for reproductive rights. We examine state actions following Dobbs and discuss the near-term implications of the decision for federalism and state governments. One effect of the Dobbs decision, evident in actions taken by some state legislatures, has been to open a window for states to enact laws imposing greater limits on reproductive options for women. However, another effect of Dobbs has been to create a greater demand for confirming and in some cases expanding reproductive rights, as seen by state constitutional amendments, supreme court decisions, and statutes protecting reproductive rights and safeguarding access to abortion services.","PeriodicalId":47224,"journal":{"name":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dobbs, American Federalism, and State Abortion Policymaking: Restrictive Policies Alongside Expansion of Reproductive Rights\",\"authors\":\"M. Mayer, John C. Morris, J. Aistrup, R. B. Anderson, Robert C. Kenter\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/publius/pjad012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturning Roe v. Wade shifted abortion-policy decision-making from the national level to the state level and opened the door for states to individually determine the level of protection for reproductive rights. We examine state actions following Dobbs and discuss the near-term implications of the decision for federalism and state governments. One effect of the Dobbs decision, evident in actions taken by some state legislatures, has been to open a window for states to enact laws imposing greater limits on reproductive options for women. However, another effect of Dobbs has been to create a greater demand for confirming and in some cases expanding reproductive rights, as seen by state constitutional amendments, supreme court decisions, and statutes protecting reproductive rights and safeguarding access to abortion services.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Publius-The Journal of Federalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjad012\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Publius-The Journal of Federalism","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjad012","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2022年6月,美国最高法院在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案(Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization)中推翻了罗伊诉韦德案(Roe v. Wade),将堕胎政策的决策从国家层面转移到了州层面,并为各州自行决定生殖权利的保护水平打开了大门。我们将考察各州在多布斯案之后的行动,并讨论该决定对联邦制和州政府的近期影响。从一些州立法机构采取的行动中可以明显看出,多布斯案的裁决的一个影响是,为各州制定法律,对妇女的生育选择施加更大的限制,打开了一扇窗。然而,多布斯案的另一个影响是创造了对确认和在某些情况下扩大生殖权利的更大需求,正如州宪法修正案、最高法院判决和保护生殖权利和保障获得堕胎服务的法规所看到的那样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dobbs, American Federalism, and State Abortion Policymaking: Restrictive Policies Alongside Expansion of Reproductive Rights
The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturning Roe v. Wade shifted abortion-policy decision-making from the national level to the state level and opened the door for states to individually determine the level of protection for reproductive rights. We examine state actions following Dobbs and discuss the near-term implications of the decision for federalism and state governments. One effect of the Dobbs decision, evident in actions taken by some state legislatures, has been to open a window for states to enact laws imposing greater limits on reproductive options for women. However, another effect of Dobbs has been to create a greater demand for confirming and in some cases expanding reproductive rights, as seen by state constitutional amendments, supreme court decisions, and statutes protecting reproductive rights and safeguarding access to abortion services.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Publius: The Journal of Federalism is the world"s leading journal devoted to federalism. It is required reading for scholars of many disciplines who want the latest developments, trends, and empirical and theoretical work on federalism and intergovernmental relations. Publius is an international journal and is interested in publishing work on federalist systems throughout the world. Its goal is to publish the latest research from around the world on federalism theory and practice; the dynamics of federal systems; intergovernmental relations and administration; regional, state and provincial governance; and comparative federalism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信