On January 18, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, a case brought by Planned Parenthood against the state of New Hampshire seeking to prohibit the state from enforcing a parental notification law. The Supreme Court chose not to explicitly rule on either of the significant constitutional questions at issue in the case. Instead, it restated its precedent that abortion restrictions must contain an exception to protect women's health, then decided the case on essentially technical grounds and returned the case to the lower courts to determine whether a narrow injunction can cure the law's constitutional defect. The district court will determine whether the legislature would have preferred no statute or a statute with a health exception.  NARAL Pro-Choice America filed an amicus brief in the case, urging the court to invalidate the statute in its entirety because it is unconstitutional for want of a health exception.

Click here to read the full text of the Supreme Court's decision.

Click here to read NARAL Pro-Choice America's amicus brief to the district court.

Click here to download a printable PDF of the entire document.