Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
E168368
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt is a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas abortion restrictions as imposing an undue burden on women’s constitutional right to access abortion.
All labels observed (4)
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1465832 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt Context triple: [Stephen G. Breyer, notableCaseParticipation, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt]
-
A.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
-
B.
Stenberg v. Carhart
Stenberg v. Carhart is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a Nebraska law banning so-called “partial-birth abortion” as unconstitutional for lacking a health exception for the mother and imposing an undue burden on abortion access.
-
C.
DeBoer v. Snyder
DeBoer v. Snyder was a federal court case challenging Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban that became one of the key cases consolidated into the landmark Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
-
D.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that closely held for-profit corporations can claim religious exemptions from certain federal regulations under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
-
E.
Mississippi Department of Health in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
The Mississippi Department of Health in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was the state agency defending Mississippi’s restrictive abortion law in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt Target entity description: Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt is a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas abortion restrictions as imposing an undue burden on women’s constitutional right to access abortion.
-
A.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
-
B.
Stenberg v. Carhart
Stenberg v. Carhart is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a Nebraska law banning so-called “partial-birth abortion” as unconstitutional for lacking a health exception for the mother and imposing an undue burden on abortion access.
-
C.
DeBoer v. Snyder
DeBoer v. Snyder was a federal court case challenging Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban that became one of the key cases consolidated into the landmark Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
-
D.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that closely held for-profit corporations can claim religious exemptions from certain federal regulations under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
-
E.
Mississippi Department of Health in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
The Mississippi Department of Health in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was the state agency defending Mississippi’s restrictive abortion law in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
abortion rights case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| alsoKnownAs |
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
ⓘ
surface form:
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, Commissioner, Texas Department of State Health Services
|
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
reproductive rights ⓘ |
| challengedProvision |
admitting-privileges requirement for abortion providers
ⓘ
surgical-center (ASC) requirement for abortion clinics ⓘ |
| challengedStatute |
House Bill 2 (2013)
ⓘ
surface form:
Texas House Bill 2 (HB2)
|
| citation | 579 U.S. ___ (2016) ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy | Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2016-06-27 ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Clarence Thomas
ⓘ
Samuel A. Alito Jr. ⓘ |
| dissentJoinedBy |
Clarence Thomas
ⓘ
John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 15-274 ⓘ |
| effect |
invalidated key provisions of Texas HB2
ⓘ
prevented closure of many Texas abortion clinics ⓘ |
| holding |
Texas admitting-privileges requirement is unconstitutional
ⓘ
Texas surgical-center requirement is unconstitutional ⓘ law imposed an undue burden on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion ⓘ |
| joinedMajority |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
Elena Kagan ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| legalIssue |
abortion regulation
ⓘ
substantive due process ⓘ undue burden standard ⓘ |
| lowerCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ⓘ |
| lowerCourtDecision | upheld Texas HB2 provisions ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ |
| originatingState | Texas ⓘ |
| petitioner |
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Whole Woman’s Health
|
| precedentReliedOn |
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
ⓘ
Roe v. Wade ⓘ |
| principle | courts must weigh asserted benefits of abortion regulations against burdens imposed ⓘ |
| respondent | John Hellerstedt ⓘ |
| respondentOffice | Commissioner of the Texas Department of State Health Services ⓘ |
| reversed | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ⓘ |
| shortName |
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Whole Woman’s Health
|
| standardClarified | undue burden standard under Planned Parenthood v. Casey ⓘ |
| term | October Term 2015 ⓘ |
| vote | 5-3 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt Description of subject: Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt is a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas abortion restrictions as imposing an undue burden on women’s constitutional right to access abortion.
Referenced by (6)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.