Roe V. Wade: Laws Against Women's Rights
Extreme English X, P6
American Experiment, P4
History Day Research Paper
November 30, 2012
Roe v. Wade: Laws against Women’s Rights Sarah Weddington, a lawyer who represented Jane Roe, once said, “It is time to renew the battle for reproductive rights. We have been outmaneuvered, outspent, out postured, and outvoted by a group of single-issue activists…Let’s make sure it takes us a shorter time to replace protection for reproductive choice” (“Sarah Weddington Quotes”). The 1973 Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade was a controversial turning point because it defined a woman’s constitutional right to privacy. While it gave women the right to control their own bodies it also sparked decades of ethical debate over a woman’s right to choose …show more content…
versus the life of her unborn child. In the 1800’s, a woman’s choice for an abortion was a large risk. Hospitals were uncommon, antiseptics were unknown and even the most preeminent doctors did not have advanced medical educations (“History of Abortion”). Although the medical field was advancing rapidly, most women wanting abortions went to illegal practitioners who did not have any of the medical advancements that were being formed (“History of Abortion”). Unsanitary and primitive methods were used in these practices, heightening the risks. While some women had received abortions unlawfully outside the country, others obtained the illicit procedures within the United States by private doctors (“History of Abortion”). These abscissions were not very reliable because doctors were faced with scrutiny from peers and hospital administrators about the unauthorized actions. Women who could not afford to acquire an illegal abortion attempted to self-induce them by douching with soap or bleach, injecting lye, or inserting a wire hanger (“History of Abortion”). These women, both who tried at home methods of abortion or got a procedure, usually died or had serious medical problems.
A law passed in 1879 in Connecticut stated, “any person who used any drug, medicinal article of instrument for the purposes of preventing conception shall be fined not less than forty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days…Any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires, or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were principle offender” (McBride, “Griswold”).This sparked the 1965 case of Griswold v. Connecticut where the Supreme Court ruled states could not prohibit the use of contraceptives because it violated the right to martial privacy (McBride, “Griswold”). The Court claimed that married couples had the right to confidentiality and were protected under the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th Amendments. Justice William O. Douglas’s opinion on the right to secrecy was very relevant to married couples, as he said “[The right to privacy] is such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of our civil and political instructions” (McBride, “Griswold”). Therefore, the Connecticut law was struck down. The “right to privacy” that was given in Griswold v. Connecticut was extended in Eisenstadt v. Baird in 1972. The cases involved William Baird, a teacher who had spoken to his students about contraception (Sheraden). After the lecture, he had given contraceptives to students and an unmarried woman had been given Emko, a vaginal spermicide (Sheraden). Baird was later arrested for violating the Massachusetts law that banned the “distribution of contraceptives by anyone other than a registered physician or registered pharmacist” (Sheraden). This law was challenged by the earlier Griswold v. Connecticut decision. On March 22, 1972, the Massachusetts law was taken back. The Supreme Court said that the law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment (Sheraden). This decision extended the right to privacy that was given in the Griswold v. Connecticut case, stating that instead of allowing only married couples to obtain contraceptives, unmarried people were now allowed to receive them as well. Frustrated with state laws and regulations, women formed groups to oppose them. Feminists, such as Susan B. Anthony, believed that the only way to end abortions was for women to have equality and freedom (Lewis). Jone Lewis stated in her article regarding abortion history, “They [early feminists] believed that prevention was more important than punishment. They blamed circumstances, laws and the men they believed drove women to abortions”. These beliefs led to the radical feminist group called Redstockings who were frustrated that legislative hearings concerning abortions typically only had men discussing it, when it was an incredibly important women’s issue (Napikoski). This adjusted the focus from changing existing laws to repealing them. Women than began to discuss these issues in speak-outs, where woman would publicly talk about their experiences with illegal abortions (Napikoski). In March of 1869, hundreds of people attended the abortion speak-out in West Village, New York City. There, women talked about their dreadful experiences during illegal “back-alley abortions” and others spoke about not being able to obtain an abortion and having to give up their child for adoption (Napikoski). These speak-outs helped women express their opinions in effective personal ways that helped sway opinions with sympathy. Abortion regulations were altered dramatically in the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade. Jane Roe, a woman trying to obtain an abortion, questioned the Texas law that made it a crime to acquire an abortion unless to save the life of the mother (Blackmun). She claimed that even though her life was not in danger, she did not have enough money to travel out of state to be given an abortion and should be able to have one in a safe environment (McBride, “Roe”). She also stated that the Texas laws were unconstitutionally broad and did not give her the right to privacy that was protected in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th amendments (Taylor). The District Court agreed that the Texas criminal abortion laws were vague and overbroad, a violation of the 9th amendment rights (Taylor). Dr. James Hallford, a Texas attorney, had joined the case as an interviewer after being charged for previously performing illegal abortions (Gale). James Hubert Hallford was a licensed physician that agreed with Jane Roe’s frustrations concerning the amount of trouble it took to attain an abortion. He claimed that he had a difficult time deciding whether he was allowed to give women abortions based on the unclear exceptions in the Texas law. (Taylor). John and Mary Doe also filed a companion complaint with Roe. They stated that they were dispossessed of their rights assured in the constitution. Mary had neural chemical disorder and was told to avoid pregnancy, so if she were to become pregnant, she would need to have an abortion (Taylor). Roe sued “on behalf of herself and all other women” in the similar situation. The Doe’s sued “on behalf of themselves and all couples similarly situated” (Taylor). Based on all three of the situations, the Court decided that Roe and Doctor Hallford had reason for suing, but the Doe’s had not given facts to present an argument (Taylor). The trial for the Supreme Court case between Jane Roe and Henry Wade was scheduled on December 13, 1971 (Gale). Justice Harry Blackmun was chosen to lead the case because he was previously a counsel to the Mayo Clinic (McBride, “Roe”). Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington, two graduates from the University of Texas Law School represented Jane Roe in the lawsuit. They claimed that the Texas law banning abortions was unconstitutional (McBride, “Roe”). The lawsuit was filed against Henry Wade, who was a Dallas County District Attorney in Texas federal court (McBride, “Roe”). At the trial, Weddington spoke in front of the Supreme Court and said that “a women’s right to make childbearing decisions free of government compulsion was fundamental to her right to control her own life (Gale). She also argued on the substantive issue by claiming that life is an ongoing process and that it is almost impossible to define the point at which life begins (Gale). Coffee used the freedoms guaranteed by the 1st,9th, and 14th amendment in her closing statement, “I think the [abortion] statute is so bad that the Court is just really going to have to strike it all down. I don’t think it’s worth salvaging” (Gale). Robert Flowers and Jay Floyd represented the state of Texas. They based their arguments on the fact that the unborn child had legal rights and the state must protect them (Gale). They also argued that Roe was reaching the end of her pregnancy and was past the point of having the Courts decision make a difference in her situation (Gale). The Supreme Court decided that the 1st, 4th, 9th and 14th amendments protect an individual’s “zone of privacy”. State laws and cited past cases ruled that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this “zone of privacy” (McBride, “Roe”). The Court said that the “zone of privacy” was “broad enough to encompass a women’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” (McBride, “Roe”). The Courts 7-2 decision stated that abortion is a private matter that is to be decided with a women and her doctor in the first three months of pregnancy (Jan. 22, 1973). They could only enact abortion regulations in the 2nd and 3rd trimester due to maternal health. In the 3rd trimester, states could only perform abortions to save the life of the unborn child (McBride, “Roe”). The Court had several reasons for disregarding the states opinions. The first was “a Victorian social concern to discourage illicit sexual conduct”, this was not important because the Court considered modern day gender roles (McBride, “Roe”). Another reason the states had for banning abortions was for protecting women’s health; this was disregarded because of advanced medical technology (McBride, “Roe”). The last reason for banning abortions was to protect prenatal life. The Supreme Court stated that prenatal life was not in definition of “persons” applied and protected in the U.S Constitution (McBride, “Roe”).They concluded that the law outlawing abortions was unconstitutional because it violated Roes right to privacy. The Roe v. Wade case was released to the public in January of 1973 (McBride, “Roe”). The decision caused immediate proceedings and controversy. Immediately after the decision was released to the public, groups like the National Right to Life Committee were created to repeal it. The group mainly consisted of Protestant ministers who were known as being Pro-Life, meaning they were against abortions and wanted to save the life of the unborn child (Independence). They believe that life begins at contraception and that the unborn child deserves the same legal protections as people. In contrast, Pro-Choice groups agreed with Roe and wanted women to choose for themselves whether or not to attain an abortion (Independence). Pro-Life supporters believed that life begins at birth, therefore they suppose that abortion regulations impede on the right women have to choose what is in their best interest (Independence). After the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, Pro-Life supporters tried to propose a Right-to-Life amendment. Although it was introduced to Congress, it never received the amount of support needed. Instead, Pro-Life followers helped pass restrictive laws on state Courts that limited the access women had to abortions (Independence). On the other hand, Pro-Choice groups formed organizations such as the National Abortion Rights Action League (Independence). In 1973, a Georgia law tried to limit the access women had to abortions. The case forced the Supreme Court to go into depth about the regulations that states were allowed to put on abortions. States attempting to regulate abortions, as well as new associations being formed, kept both sides in a constant battle for woman’s right to obtain an abortion. The full right for women to have an abortion was severely limited with the Hyde Amendment of 1976, which banned Medicaid coverage of abortion (Independence). Low-income women began to sell their belongings, starve, and even risk using their rent money to for abortions when the Hyde Amendment went into effect in 1977 (National). Women who could not save up enough money to pay for an abortion were forced to carry the pregnancy to term. Many women considered this to be inequitable. Justice Thurgood Marshall stated, “The Hyde Amendment is designed to deprive poor and minority women of the constitutional right to choose abortion” (National). He disagreed with the majority opinion in the 1980 Supreme Court decision upholding the Hyde Amendment. It caused many pregnant women to feel deprived of their rights by forcing them to struggle to earn the amount of money needed to acquire an abortion. The decision of Roe v.
Wade was questioned in the 1992 Supreme Court case Casey v. Planned Parenthood. The case involved the 1982 Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act. This act required women to get an informed consent before they could procure an abortion (“Planned Parenthood”). This forced a 24 hour waiting period, during this time women were given information concerning abortion the procedure (McBride, “Casey”). The Act also required minors to get consent from their parents, and if this came to be an issue, courts could let the obligation pass. Wives were also required to notify their husbands about the course of action except in “medical emergencies” (McBride, “Casey”). It also made it essential for Pennsylvania Abortion clinics to report themselves to the state. It was wondered if the Abortion Control Act was constitutional under the 14th Amendment (“Planned …show more content…
Parenthood”). In 1992, the Supreme Court reaffirmed Roe v. Wade but also declared that a large amount of the Pennsylvania Law was constitutional (McBride, “Casey”). The Court confirmed that states could not ban abortions before the point at which the fetus was capable of life. States were also not allowed to ban abortions that helped save the life of the mother. They discarded parts of Roe claiming that states can legally pass laws protecting the health and life of the fetus or mother. Instead of states not having part in any of the first trimester, they could now pass laws as long as they didn’t limit the women’s access (McBride, “Casey”). Regulations that were obstacles for women trying to get abortions violated women’s constitutional right to an abortion (McBride, “Casey”). The Supreme Court reviewed the Pennsylvania Law and upheld the 24 hour waiting period, as well as the parental consent. They did not uphold the spouse agreement because they believed it could possibly lead to abuse (McBride, “Casey”). This case was significant because it broadened states authority to regulate abortions and altered some of the aspects of the Roe v. Wade case. Today, the opinions regarding abortions are highly debated. In the 2012 Vice Presidential Debate, Joe Biden and Paul Ryan spoke of their beliefs concerning abortions. Both are Catholics and believe that life begins when the child is conceived (Joe Biden). Although Joe Biden does accept his Catholic Church’s views on abortion, he refuses to impose it on equally devoted Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. Paul Ryan states that he is Pro-Life and that under the Romney administration policy they would oppose abortions with the exception for rape, incest, and life of the mother (Joe Biden). This provides evidence that abortion is still a litigious topic that is being deliberated. In 1994, Justice Harry Blackmun stated Roe v. Wade was, “a step that had to be taken as we go down the road toward the full emancipation of women”. Roe v. Wade proves to be a crucial turning point for women’s rights. Although the laws and regulations of abortions are constantly changing, the case did grant women more confidentiality and control in their choices that they had not been bestowed with before. Today, the topic is still very contentious and confirms that the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade was very significant and would affect the daily lives of ordinary citizens.
Work Cited
Primary Sources:
Blackmun, Justice. "Roe v. Wade." Cornell University Law School. N.p.. Web. 18 Nov 2012.
.
This is a primary source. It showed the Supreme Court’s reasoning and decision regarding abortions. It also provided credible detail on other citizens who agreed with Jane Roe. I used this information in my historical background to state what the Texas law was before the Roe v. Wade case.
Jan. 22, 1973: Roe V. Wade. 1973. Video. ABC News. Web. 12 Nov 2012.
.
This is a primary source. It showed a video from ABC News in 1973. It gave me information about what was released to the public about the case. In my paper, I used it in my second prong, describing the different ‘Terms of Privacy’ described in various amendments. It was essential to help the reader understand the relevancy of the argument.
"Sarah Weddington Quotes." goodreads. N.p.. Web. 18 Nov 2012.
.
This is a primary web document. It provided me with useful quotes that were said by Sarah Weddington. I used one of these quotes as my attention getter to prove women’s frustrations and ambition to give women the right to obtain an abortion.
Taylor, Quintard. "Roe v. Wade (1973)." United States History: Primary Documents. N.p.. Web.
22 Oct 2012. .
This is a primary web document. It showed the actual Roe v. Wade case which helped me have a better understanding about all of the factors that lead into the Supreme Court’s decision. It also provided valuable details about the amendments that were considered during the Roe v. Wade trial. I used this information in my first prong to show the different opinions and aspects of the case.
Secondary Sources:
"History of Abortion." National Abortion Federation. N.p.. Web. 12 Nov 2012.
.
This is a secondary web document. It gave information about what was going on in the United States before Roe v. Wade. It helped provide accurate historical background. This document was very helpful in putting together my historical background portion, providing detailed context regarding the history of abortion. It also gave me some information on the Roe v. Wade case, which I used throughout my first prong.
Joe Biden and Paul Ryan Debate Abortion (2012 Vice Presidential Debate). 2012. Web. 23 Oct
2012. .
This is a secondary web document. It shows the debate between the two vice president candidates and how abortions are still very controversial. It provided in depth details on the arguments between the two potential vice presidents, showing both of their opinions of the topic of abortion. I used it in my conclusion paragraph to demonstrate how abortion is still a litigious subject, showing the relevance of the topic.
Lewis, Jone. "Abortion History." Women 's History. N.p.. Web. 13 Nov 2012.
.
This is a secondary web document. It explained what women did to express their opinions during Roe v. Wade. It contained quotes and background information on several feminists at the time. I used this source in my first prong, stating the belief towards woman’s rights, which helped demonstrate how groups like the Redstockings came to be. It is essential to show how these groups affected the abortion conflict, and how they made an impact on woman’s rights.
McBride, Alex. "Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992)." The Supreme Court. N.p. Web. 13 Nov
2012. .
This source is a secondary web document. It gave details about the 1992 Supreme Court case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood. It also gave information about the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act which had the reason for the 1992 case. I used these details throughout my second prong to prove how the Courts decision in Roe v. Wade was tested in states that were not yet willing to provide abortions with legal abortions.
McBride, Alex. “Griswold v. Connecticut (1965).” The Supreme Court. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Nov 2012. .
This secondary web document explained the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut case. It provided me with basic information that was very useful throughout my historical background. This information was necessary to show the disagreements with laws and cases that eventually lead to the Roe v. Wade case.
McBride, Alex. “Roe v. Wade (1973).” The Supreme Court. N.P., Dec. 2006. Web. 13 Sep 2012. .
This is a secondary web document.
It gave me essential information about the Roe v. Wade case in 1973. It provided details about Jane Roes reasoning for going to Court, as well as the arguments that the lawyers defending Roe and the state of Texas brought up. This source also stated the Supreme Court’s decision regarding a woman’s right to an abortion, which was crucial to prove how the case was a turning point in American history.
Napikoski, Linda. "Abortion Speak-out." Women 's History. N.p.. Web. 13 Nov 2012.
.
This secondary web document gave me valuable information about how women expressed to others their opinions. It also provided facts about the women activists group called Redstockings. It demonstrated their frustration towards laws that made it difficult for women to obtain abortions. I used this information in my historical background to show the effects women on society.
"Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey." Case Briefs. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sep 2012.
This is a secondary web document. It provided precise information about the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act which I used in my second prong. It gave details about the requirements that women and young adults were given, and whether they were constitutional under the 14th amendment. This was important because it showed the basis of Casey v. Planned
Parenthood.
Sheraden, Seward. "Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)." Embryo Project Encyclopedia. Arizona: 2008.
.
This is a secondary web document. I used it in my historical background to give details about the 1972 case of Eisenstadt v. Baird. It helped demonstrate the regulations that were put on the use of contraceptives by talking about a Massachusetts law that had been violated.
"Roe v. Wade and its Impact." U.S. History. Independence Hall Association, n.d. Web. 27 Sep
2012. .
This secondary web document gave me information on the immediate effects of the 1973 Supreme Court decision. It talked about the differences between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice supporters and the organizations they created. It also stated how the Hyde Amendment of 1976 limited women’s right to obtain an abortion.
“Roe v. Wade: 1973”. Gale Cenage Learning.N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sep 2012 .
This is a secondary web document. It gave a detailed summary of the Roe v. Wade case which I used throughout my first prong. It stated quotes from Jane Roes lawyers Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee. It helped explained what amendments they based their arguments on which helped me prove the controversy of the case.
"What is the Hyde Amendment?". National Network of Abortion Funds. N.p.. Web. 13 Nov
2012. .
This secondary web document described the Hyde Amendment in depth. It gave me information about the amendment banning Medicaid coverage on abortion. It described in detail how it affected women and what they sacrificed to have the money for an abortion.
American Experiment, P4
History Day Research Paper
November 30, 2012
Roe v. Wade: Laws against Women’s Rights Sarah Weddington, a lawyer who represented Jane Roe, once said, “It is time to renew the battle for reproductive rights. We have been outmaneuvered, outspent, out postured, and outvoted by a group of single-issue activists…Let’s make sure it takes us a shorter time to replace protection for reproductive choice” (“Sarah Weddington Quotes”). The 1973 Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade was a controversial turning point because it defined a woman’s constitutional right to privacy. While it gave women the right to control their own bodies it also sparked decades of ethical debate over a woman’s right to choose …show more content…
versus the life of her unborn child. In the 1800’s, a woman’s choice for an abortion was a large risk. Hospitals were uncommon, antiseptics were unknown and even the most preeminent doctors did not have advanced medical educations (“History of Abortion”). Although the medical field was advancing rapidly, most women wanting abortions went to illegal practitioners who did not have any of the medical advancements that were being formed (“History of Abortion”). Unsanitary and primitive methods were used in these practices, heightening the risks. While some women had received abortions unlawfully outside the country, others obtained the illicit procedures within the United States by private doctors (“History of Abortion”). These abscissions were not very reliable because doctors were faced with scrutiny from peers and hospital administrators about the unauthorized actions. Women who could not afford to acquire an illegal abortion attempted to self-induce them by douching with soap or bleach, injecting lye, or inserting a wire hanger (“History of Abortion”). These women, both who tried at home methods of abortion or got a procedure, usually died or had serious medical problems.
A law passed in 1879 in Connecticut stated, “any person who used any drug, medicinal article of instrument for the purposes of preventing conception shall be fined not less than forty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days…Any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires, or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were principle offender” (McBride, “Griswold”).This sparked the 1965 case of Griswold v. Connecticut where the Supreme Court ruled states could not prohibit the use of contraceptives because it violated the right to martial privacy (McBride, “Griswold”). The Court claimed that married couples had the right to confidentiality and were protected under the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th Amendments. Justice William O. Douglas’s opinion on the right to secrecy was very relevant to married couples, as he said “[The right to privacy] is such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of our civil and political instructions” (McBride, “Griswold”). Therefore, the Connecticut law was struck down. The “right to privacy” that was given in Griswold v. Connecticut was extended in Eisenstadt v. Baird in 1972. The cases involved William Baird, a teacher who had spoken to his students about contraception (Sheraden). After the lecture, he had given contraceptives to students and an unmarried woman had been given Emko, a vaginal spermicide (Sheraden). Baird was later arrested for violating the Massachusetts law that banned the “distribution of contraceptives by anyone other than a registered physician or registered pharmacist” (Sheraden). This law was challenged by the earlier Griswold v. Connecticut decision. On March 22, 1972, the Massachusetts law was taken back. The Supreme Court said that the law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment (Sheraden). This decision extended the right to privacy that was given in the Griswold v. Connecticut case, stating that instead of allowing only married couples to obtain contraceptives, unmarried people were now allowed to receive them as well. Frustrated with state laws and regulations, women formed groups to oppose them. Feminists, such as Susan B. Anthony, believed that the only way to end abortions was for women to have equality and freedom (Lewis). Jone Lewis stated in her article regarding abortion history, “They [early feminists] believed that prevention was more important than punishment. They blamed circumstances, laws and the men they believed drove women to abortions”. These beliefs led to the radical feminist group called Redstockings who were frustrated that legislative hearings concerning abortions typically only had men discussing it, when it was an incredibly important women’s issue (Napikoski). This adjusted the focus from changing existing laws to repealing them. Women than began to discuss these issues in speak-outs, where woman would publicly talk about their experiences with illegal abortions (Napikoski). In March of 1869, hundreds of people attended the abortion speak-out in West Village, New York City. There, women talked about their dreadful experiences during illegal “back-alley abortions” and others spoke about not being able to obtain an abortion and having to give up their child for adoption (Napikoski). These speak-outs helped women express their opinions in effective personal ways that helped sway opinions with sympathy. Abortion regulations were altered dramatically in the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade. Jane Roe, a woman trying to obtain an abortion, questioned the Texas law that made it a crime to acquire an abortion unless to save the life of the mother (Blackmun). She claimed that even though her life was not in danger, she did not have enough money to travel out of state to be given an abortion and should be able to have one in a safe environment (McBride, “Roe”). She also stated that the Texas laws were unconstitutionally broad and did not give her the right to privacy that was protected in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th amendments (Taylor). The District Court agreed that the Texas criminal abortion laws were vague and overbroad, a violation of the 9th amendment rights (Taylor). Dr. James Hallford, a Texas attorney, had joined the case as an interviewer after being charged for previously performing illegal abortions (Gale). James Hubert Hallford was a licensed physician that agreed with Jane Roe’s frustrations concerning the amount of trouble it took to attain an abortion. He claimed that he had a difficult time deciding whether he was allowed to give women abortions based on the unclear exceptions in the Texas law. (Taylor). John and Mary Doe also filed a companion complaint with Roe. They stated that they were dispossessed of their rights assured in the constitution. Mary had neural chemical disorder and was told to avoid pregnancy, so if she were to become pregnant, she would need to have an abortion (Taylor). Roe sued “on behalf of herself and all other women” in the similar situation. The Doe’s sued “on behalf of themselves and all couples similarly situated” (Taylor). Based on all three of the situations, the Court decided that Roe and Doctor Hallford had reason for suing, but the Doe’s had not given facts to present an argument (Taylor). The trial for the Supreme Court case between Jane Roe and Henry Wade was scheduled on December 13, 1971 (Gale). Justice Harry Blackmun was chosen to lead the case because he was previously a counsel to the Mayo Clinic (McBride, “Roe”). Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington, two graduates from the University of Texas Law School represented Jane Roe in the lawsuit. They claimed that the Texas law banning abortions was unconstitutional (McBride, “Roe”). The lawsuit was filed against Henry Wade, who was a Dallas County District Attorney in Texas federal court (McBride, “Roe”). At the trial, Weddington spoke in front of the Supreme Court and said that “a women’s right to make childbearing decisions free of government compulsion was fundamental to her right to control her own life (Gale). She also argued on the substantive issue by claiming that life is an ongoing process and that it is almost impossible to define the point at which life begins (Gale). Coffee used the freedoms guaranteed by the 1st,9th, and 14th amendment in her closing statement, “I think the [abortion] statute is so bad that the Court is just really going to have to strike it all down. I don’t think it’s worth salvaging” (Gale). Robert Flowers and Jay Floyd represented the state of Texas. They based their arguments on the fact that the unborn child had legal rights and the state must protect them (Gale). They also argued that Roe was reaching the end of her pregnancy and was past the point of having the Courts decision make a difference in her situation (Gale). The Supreme Court decided that the 1st, 4th, 9th and 14th amendments protect an individual’s “zone of privacy”. State laws and cited past cases ruled that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this “zone of privacy” (McBride, “Roe”). The Court said that the “zone of privacy” was “broad enough to encompass a women’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” (McBride, “Roe”). The Courts 7-2 decision stated that abortion is a private matter that is to be decided with a women and her doctor in the first three months of pregnancy (Jan. 22, 1973). They could only enact abortion regulations in the 2nd and 3rd trimester due to maternal health. In the 3rd trimester, states could only perform abortions to save the life of the unborn child (McBride, “Roe”). The Court had several reasons for disregarding the states opinions. The first was “a Victorian social concern to discourage illicit sexual conduct”, this was not important because the Court considered modern day gender roles (McBride, “Roe”). Another reason the states had for banning abortions was for protecting women’s health; this was disregarded because of advanced medical technology (McBride, “Roe”). The last reason for banning abortions was to protect prenatal life. The Supreme Court stated that prenatal life was not in definition of “persons” applied and protected in the U.S Constitution (McBride, “Roe”).They concluded that the law outlawing abortions was unconstitutional because it violated Roes right to privacy. The Roe v. Wade case was released to the public in January of 1973 (McBride, “Roe”). The decision caused immediate proceedings and controversy. Immediately after the decision was released to the public, groups like the National Right to Life Committee were created to repeal it. The group mainly consisted of Protestant ministers who were known as being Pro-Life, meaning they were against abortions and wanted to save the life of the unborn child (Independence). They believe that life begins at contraception and that the unborn child deserves the same legal protections as people. In contrast, Pro-Choice groups agreed with Roe and wanted women to choose for themselves whether or not to attain an abortion (Independence). Pro-Life supporters believed that life begins at birth, therefore they suppose that abortion regulations impede on the right women have to choose what is in their best interest (Independence). After the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, Pro-Life supporters tried to propose a Right-to-Life amendment. Although it was introduced to Congress, it never received the amount of support needed. Instead, Pro-Life followers helped pass restrictive laws on state Courts that limited the access women had to abortions (Independence). On the other hand, Pro-Choice groups formed organizations such as the National Abortion Rights Action League (Independence). In 1973, a Georgia law tried to limit the access women had to abortions. The case forced the Supreme Court to go into depth about the regulations that states were allowed to put on abortions. States attempting to regulate abortions, as well as new associations being formed, kept both sides in a constant battle for woman’s right to obtain an abortion. The full right for women to have an abortion was severely limited with the Hyde Amendment of 1976, which banned Medicaid coverage of abortion (Independence). Low-income women began to sell their belongings, starve, and even risk using their rent money to for abortions when the Hyde Amendment went into effect in 1977 (National). Women who could not save up enough money to pay for an abortion were forced to carry the pregnancy to term. Many women considered this to be inequitable. Justice Thurgood Marshall stated, “The Hyde Amendment is designed to deprive poor and minority women of the constitutional right to choose abortion” (National). He disagreed with the majority opinion in the 1980 Supreme Court decision upholding the Hyde Amendment. It caused many pregnant women to feel deprived of their rights by forcing them to struggle to earn the amount of money needed to acquire an abortion. The decision of Roe v.
Wade was questioned in the 1992 Supreme Court case Casey v. Planned Parenthood. The case involved the 1982 Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act. This act required women to get an informed consent before they could procure an abortion (“Planned Parenthood”). This forced a 24 hour waiting period, during this time women were given information concerning abortion the procedure (McBride, “Casey”). The Act also required minors to get consent from their parents, and if this came to be an issue, courts could let the obligation pass. Wives were also required to notify their husbands about the course of action except in “medical emergencies” (McBride, “Casey”). It also made it essential for Pennsylvania Abortion clinics to report themselves to the state. It was wondered if the Abortion Control Act was constitutional under the 14th Amendment (“Planned …show more content…
Parenthood”). In 1992, the Supreme Court reaffirmed Roe v. Wade but also declared that a large amount of the Pennsylvania Law was constitutional (McBride, “Casey”). The Court confirmed that states could not ban abortions before the point at which the fetus was capable of life. States were also not allowed to ban abortions that helped save the life of the mother. They discarded parts of Roe claiming that states can legally pass laws protecting the health and life of the fetus or mother. Instead of states not having part in any of the first trimester, they could now pass laws as long as they didn’t limit the women’s access (McBride, “Casey”). Regulations that were obstacles for women trying to get abortions violated women’s constitutional right to an abortion (McBride, “Casey”). The Supreme Court reviewed the Pennsylvania Law and upheld the 24 hour waiting period, as well as the parental consent. They did not uphold the spouse agreement because they believed it could possibly lead to abuse (McBride, “Casey”). This case was significant because it broadened states authority to regulate abortions and altered some of the aspects of the Roe v. Wade case. Today, the opinions regarding abortions are highly debated. In the 2012 Vice Presidential Debate, Joe Biden and Paul Ryan spoke of their beliefs concerning abortions. Both are Catholics and believe that life begins when the child is conceived (Joe Biden). Although Joe Biden does accept his Catholic Church’s views on abortion, he refuses to impose it on equally devoted Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. Paul Ryan states that he is Pro-Life and that under the Romney administration policy they would oppose abortions with the exception for rape, incest, and life of the mother (Joe Biden). This provides evidence that abortion is still a litigious topic that is being deliberated. In 1994, Justice Harry Blackmun stated Roe v. Wade was, “a step that had to be taken as we go down the road toward the full emancipation of women”. Roe v. Wade proves to be a crucial turning point for women’s rights. Although the laws and regulations of abortions are constantly changing, the case did grant women more confidentiality and control in their choices that they had not been bestowed with before. Today, the topic is still very contentious and confirms that the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade was very significant and would affect the daily lives of ordinary citizens.
Work Cited
Primary Sources:
Blackmun, Justice. "Roe v. Wade." Cornell University Law School. N.p.. Web. 18 Nov 2012.
.
This is a primary source. It showed the Supreme Court’s reasoning and decision regarding abortions. It also provided credible detail on other citizens who agreed with Jane Roe. I used this information in my historical background to state what the Texas law was before the Roe v. Wade case.
Jan. 22, 1973: Roe V. Wade. 1973. Video. ABC News. Web. 12 Nov 2012.
.
This is a primary source. It showed a video from ABC News in 1973. It gave me information about what was released to the public about the case. In my paper, I used it in my second prong, describing the different ‘Terms of Privacy’ described in various amendments. It was essential to help the reader understand the relevancy of the argument.
"Sarah Weddington Quotes." goodreads. N.p.. Web. 18 Nov 2012.
.
This is a primary web document. It provided me with useful quotes that were said by Sarah Weddington. I used one of these quotes as my attention getter to prove women’s frustrations and ambition to give women the right to obtain an abortion.
Taylor, Quintard. "Roe v. Wade (1973)." United States History: Primary Documents. N.p.. Web.
22 Oct 2012. .
This is a primary web document. It showed the actual Roe v. Wade case which helped me have a better understanding about all of the factors that lead into the Supreme Court’s decision. It also provided valuable details about the amendments that were considered during the Roe v. Wade trial. I used this information in my first prong to show the different opinions and aspects of the case.
Secondary Sources:
"History of Abortion." National Abortion Federation. N.p.. Web. 12 Nov 2012.
.
This is a secondary web document. It gave information about what was going on in the United States before Roe v. Wade. It helped provide accurate historical background. This document was very helpful in putting together my historical background portion, providing detailed context regarding the history of abortion. It also gave me some information on the Roe v. Wade case, which I used throughout my first prong.
Joe Biden and Paul Ryan Debate Abortion (2012 Vice Presidential Debate). 2012. Web. 23 Oct
2012. .
This is a secondary web document. It shows the debate between the two vice president candidates and how abortions are still very controversial. It provided in depth details on the arguments between the two potential vice presidents, showing both of their opinions of the topic of abortion. I used it in my conclusion paragraph to demonstrate how abortion is still a litigious subject, showing the relevance of the topic.
Lewis, Jone. "Abortion History." Women 's History. N.p.. Web. 13 Nov 2012.
.
This is a secondary web document. It explained what women did to express their opinions during Roe v. Wade. It contained quotes and background information on several feminists at the time. I used this source in my first prong, stating the belief towards woman’s rights, which helped demonstrate how groups like the Redstockings came to be. It is essential to show how these groups affected the abortion conflict, and how they made an impact on woman’s rights.
McBride, Alex. "Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992)." The Supreme Court. N.p. Web. 13 Nov
2012. .
This source is a secondary web document. It gave details about the 1992 Supreme Court case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood. It also gave information about the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act which had the reason for the 1992 case. I used these details throughout my second prong to prove how the Courts decision in Roe v. Wade was tested in states that were not yet willing to provide abortions with legal abortions.
McBride, Alex. “Griswold v. Connecticut (1965).” The Supreme Court. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Nov 2012. .
This secondary web document explained the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut case. It provided me with basic information that was very useful throughout my historical background. This information was necessary to show the disagreements with laws and cases that eventually lead to the Roe v. Wade case.
McBride, Alex. “Roe v. Wade (1973).” The Supreme Court. N.P., Dec. 2006. Web. 13 Sep 2012. .
This is a secondary web document.
It gave me essential information about the Roe v. Wade case in 1973. It provided details about Jane Roes reasoning for going to Court, as well as the arguments that the lawyers defending Roe and the state of Texas brought up. This source also stated the Supreme Court’s decision regarding a woman’s right to an abortion, which was crucial to prove how the case was a turning point in American history.
Napikoski, Linda. "Abortion Speak-out." Women 's History. N.p.. Web. 13 Nov 2012.
.
This secondary web document gave me valuable information about how women expressed to others their opinions. It also provided facts about the women activists group called Redstockings. It demonstrated their frustration towards laws that made it difficult for women to obtain abortions. I used this information in my historical background to show the effects women on society.
"Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey." Case Briefs. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sep 2012.
This is a secondary web document. It provided precise information about the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act which I used in my second prong. It gave details about the requirements that women and young adults were given, and whether they were constitutional under the 14th amendment. This was important because it showed the basis of Casey v. Planned
Parenthood.
Sheraden, Seward. "Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)." Embryo Project Encyclopedia. Arizona: 2008.
.
This is a secondary web document. I used it in my historical background to give details about the 1972 case of Eisenstadt v. Baird. It helped demonstrate the regulations that were put on the use of contraceptives by talking about a Massachusetts law that had been violated.
"Roe v. Wade and its Impact." U.S. History. Independence Hall Association, n.d. Web. 27 Sep
2012. .
This secondary web document gave me information on the immediate effects of the 1973 Supreme Court decision. It talked about the differences between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice supporters and the organizations they created. It also stated how the Hyde Amendment of 1976 limited women’s right to obtain an abortion.
“Roe v. Wade: 1973”. Gale Cenage Learning.N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sep 2012 .
This is a secondary web document. It gave a detailed summary of the Roe v. Wade case which I used throughout my first prong. It stated quotes from Jane Roes lawyers Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee. It helped explained what amendments they based their arguments on which helped me prove the controversy of the case.
"What is the Hyde Amendment?". National Network of Abortion Funds. N.p.. Web. 13 Nov
2012. .
This secondary web document described the Hyde Amendment in depth. It gave me information about the amendment banning Medicaid coverage on abortion. It described in detail how it affected women and what they sacrificed to have the money for an abortion.