 |
| Rust v. Sullivan | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 30, 1990 Decided May 23, 1991 | |
| Full case name | Irving Rust, et al., Petitioners v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services; New York, et al., Petitioners v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services |
| Citations | 500 U.S. 173 (more) 111 S. Ct. 1759; 114 L. Ed. 2d 233; 1991 U.S. LEXIS 2908; 59 U.S.L.W. 4451; 91 Cal. Daily Op. Service 3713; 91 Daily Journal DAR 6006 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Summary judgment for defendant, 690 F. Supp. 1261 (S.D.N.Y. 1988); affirmed, 889 F.2d 401 (2d Cir. 1989). |
| Holding | |
| Health and Human Services regulations prohibiting recipients of government funds from advocating, counseling, or referring patients for abortion were a permissible construction of Title X of the Act, nor did they violate the First or Fifth Amendments. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by White, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter |
| Dissent | Blackmun, joined by Marshall; Stevens (parts II, III); O'Connor (part I) |
| Dissent | Stevens |
| Dissent | O'Connor |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. I, V; Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300–300a-8 | |
Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991), was a case in the United States Supreme Court that upheld Department of Health and Human Services regulations prohibiting employees in federally funded family-planning facilities from counseling a patient on abortion.[1] The department had removed all family planning programs that involving abortions. Physicians and clinics challenged this decision within the Supreme Court, arguing that the First Amendment was violated due to the implementation of this new policy. The Supreme Court, by a 5–4 verdict, allowed the regulation to go into effect, holding that the regulation was a reasonable interpretation of the Public Health Service Act, and that the First Amendment is not violated when the government merely chooses to "fund one activity to the exclusion of another".[1]