| Mazurek v. Armstrong | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided June 16, 1997 | |
| Full case name | Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General of Montana v. James H. Armstrong, et al. |
| Citations | 520 U.S. 968 (more) |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Preliminary injunction denied in relevant part sub nom. Armstrong v. Mazurek, 906 F. Supp. 561 (D. Mont. 1995); vacated and remanded, 94 F.3d 566 (9th Cir. 1996) |
| Holding | |
| A Montana law that allows only physicians to perform abortions is constitutional because there is no evidence that it was intended to burden a woman's right to choose. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Per curiam | |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. Amend. XIV | |
Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a Montana law permitting only licensed physicians to perform abortions.[1] The Court summarily reversed a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that had held that the law was likely intended to inhibit abortion access. In a per curiam opinion, a majority of the Court found that there was no evidence that the Montana legislature acted with an invalid intent. The Court also reiterated its earlier holding in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that the states have broad flexibility to regulate abortion so long as their regulations do not create an undue burden on a woman's right to choose. Three dissenting justices, in an opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens, wrote that they would have declined to hear the case because proceedings were still pending in the lower courts. The law itself was later struck down by the Montana Supreme Court on state-constitutional grounds.