Ernest v. United States Attorney

Fourth Circuit

Ernest v. United States Attorney

768 F.2d 596

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 5, 1985

DocketNo. 85-1388

StatusPublished

This text of 768 F.2d 596 (Ernest v. United States Attorney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ernest v. United States Attorney, 768 F.2d 596 (4th Cir. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, Alan Ernest, brought this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging the constitutionality of abortion and asking the district court to declare that Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), is contrary to the Constitution. The district court held a hearing and dismissed his action. We agree that Roe v. Wade is binding on the district court and on this Court.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. Since it would not aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, Alan Ernest, brought this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging the constitutionality of abortion and asking the district court to declare that Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), is contrary to the Constitution. The district court held a hearing and dismissed his action. We agree that Roe v. Wade is binding on the district court and on this Court.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. Since it would not aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

768 F.2d 596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ernest-v-united-states-attorney-ca4-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack