How to Write a Case Brief
AP US Government
Chief Justice (Teachers name)
Roe v. Wade
On writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court
Oral Argument: 12/19/2012
Name
Attorney for Wade
Jane Roe, a pregnant single mother, who wished to have an abortion in the State of Texas, sued on behalf of all mothers seeking abortions to prevent the enforcement of the Texas abortion ban. The appellant has challenged the Texas statue, claiming it violates the 1st, 5th, 9th and 14th amendment’s implied right to privacy which was established in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). The Texas statute under attack here is typical of those that are and have been in effect in many States for over a century without conflict. I am appealing the court to rule in favor of the respondent Henry Wade and uphold the constitutionality of the Texas statue concerning abortion. I hold that the state of Texas and all other states hold a legitimate interest in protecting the health of the mother and the potential of human life, where our interest grows and reaches a "compelling" point at certain stages of the woman 's pregnancy. I also hold that the right to privacy is nowhere explicitly stated in the Constitution. In addition I would like to highlight the decision in Griswold v. Connecticut established privacy in a marital relationship and abortions are not of a private matter. Also the 14th amendment in its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property, therefore the Texas legislature was protecting the right to life of the fetus and the court by overturning the law, would thereby disvalue the 14th amendment’s Due Process Clause. Again I urge the court to consider and affirm the constitutionality of the Texas abortion law based on the on the aforementioned grounds.
Legal Argument 1: Texas holds a legitimate state interest in protecting the health of the mother and the potential of life of the fetus.
The Republic of Texas holds
Chief Justice (Teachers name)
Roe v. Wade
On writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court
Oral Argument: 12/19/2012
Name
Attorney for Wade
Jane Roe, a pregnant single mother, who wished to have an abortion in the State of Texas, sued on behalf of all mothers seeking abortions to prevent the enforcement of the Texas abortion ban. The appellant has challenged the Texas statue, claiming it violates the 1st, 5th, 9th and 14th amendment’s implied right to privacy which was established in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). The Texas statute under attack here is typical of those that are and have been in effect in many States for over a century without conflict. I am appealing the court to rule in favor of the respondent Henry Wade and uphold the constitutionality of the Texas statue concerning abortion. I hold that the state of Texas and all other states hold a legitimate interest in protecting the health of the mother and the potential of human life, where our interest grows and reaches a "compelling" point at certain stages of the woman 's pregnancy. I also hold that the right to privacy is nowhere explicitly stated in the Constitution. In addition I would like to highlight the decision in Griswold v. Connecticut established privacy in a marital relationship and abortions are not of a private matter. Also the 14th amendment in its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property, therefore the Texas legislature was protecting the right to life of the fetus and the court by overturning the law, would thereby disvalue the 14th amendment’s Due Process Clause. Again I urge the court to consider and affirm the constitutionality of the Texas abortion law based on the on the aforementioned grounds.
Legal Argument 1: Texas holds a legitimate state interest in protecting the health of the mother and the potential of life of the fetus.
The Republic of Texas holds
Cited: "Constitution of the United States - Official." Constitution of the United States - Official. US Archives, n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2013. <http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html>. Dudley, William "The Oyez Project." The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2013. "The Right to an Abortion." The Right to an Abortion. University of Missouri at Kansas City, n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2013. <http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/Roeargs.htm>. "Roe v "Roe v. Wade." Roe v. Wade. Cornell Law School, 13 Dec. 1971. Web. 10 Jan. 2013. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZD.html>. Williamson v