Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
2022 U.S. Supreme Court judgement on abortion
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the court held that the United States Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. The court's decision overruled both Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), recognizing the authority of state governments to regulate any aspect of abortion that federal law does not preempt.
The case concerned the constitutionality of a 2018 Mississippi state law that banned most abortion operations after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. Jackson Women's Health Organization—Mississippi's only abortion clinic at the time—had sued Thomas E. Dobbs, state health officer with the Mississippi State Department of Health, in March 2018. Lower courts had enjoined enforcement of the law. The injunctions were based on the ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which had prevented states from banning abortion before fetal viability, generally within the first 24 weeks, on the basis that a woman's choice for abortion during that time is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
“Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization” enters the record as 2022 U.S. Supreme Court judgement on abortion. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Dobbs, Jackson and Women's can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Dobbs, Jackson and Women's provides the most credible route into that argument.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q107058269. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2022, 1973, 1992 and 2018.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization primary sources, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization archive and Dobbs research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.