Roe v. Wade | Homework Help from the Bill of Rights Institute
Do women have a right to privacy when deciding whether to have an abortion? In 1969, a woman under the alias “Jane Roe” challenged a Texas law that outlawed abortions. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, where Roe argued that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to privacy in having an abortion. In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled the right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
Like other Supreme Court cases related to the Due Process Clause, incorporation played a part in the Roe v. Wade ruling. Incorporation suggests that states must adhere to the protections granted in the Bill of Rights.
To this day, the ruling in Roe v. Wade remains one of the most controversial Supreme Court decisions.
0:00 Speaker 1: In 1973, the Supreme Court made the monumental decision that a right to privacy extends to a woman’s decision to have an abortion. Speaker 2: Heated debates on this ruling rage on to this day. On what basis was this case decided? This is the story of Roe V. Wade. [music]
0:27 [cheering] Speaker 1: It was 1969 and the women’s liberation movement was underway. Reproductive rights, namely birth control and abortion, were at the forefront of this battle. This was the situation in Dallas, Texas when a 21-year-old woman became pregnant. She sought an abortion but was unable to obtain one as abortion was illegal in the state of Texas.
0:49 She was then referred to attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington who challenged the Texas law in US district court as a violation of the right to privacy. Speaker 2: The woman used the legal pseudonym Jane Roe against the defendant, Dallas district attorney Henry Wade. While the district court judges unanimously found Texas abortion law unconstitutional,
1:10 they also declined to issue an injunction against the enforcement of the law. The case was then appealed and taken to the Supreme Court in 1970. Speaker 1: There was a major complication. Roe would give birth to her child before the proceedings. No longer in need of an abortion, would she step back from the case or move on to the highest court?
1:31 Speaker 2: Despite her child’s birth, Roe remained plaintiff as opening arguments were heard in 1971. Representing Roe, Coffee in Weddington built their case on the right to privacy. Speaker 1: They pointed out the right to privacy was articulated. They appealed to the right of privacy that was defined in Griswold v. Connecticut which ruled that our right to privacy
1:53 was found with an appeal to the 1st, 4th, 9th, and 14th amendment. Speaker 2: Coffee and Weddington maintain that doctors had a fundamental right to give medical care and the women had the right to a safe abortion whether or not their life was in jeopardy. Speaker 1: Attorney Jay Floyd represented Wade maintaining that a fetus is defined as
2:13 a person within the meaning of the 14th amendment. Speaker 2: He saw it as the court’s duty to preserve a respect for that life, declaring that even if the right to privacy was implicated, the state of Texas should still protect its abortion laws. Speaker 1: Furthermore, he told the court that the right to privacy was never explicitly guaranteed in the constitution. Speaker 2: With the Supreme court under an intense spotlight
2:35 amongst divided America, what would their decision be? Speaker 1: It would be a count of 7-2 in favor of Jane Roe with the majority decisions written by Justice Blackmun. Speaker 2: Blackmun maintained that a woman’s right to abortion fell within a right to privacy protected by the 14th amendment due process clause. Speaker 1: Furthermore, he
2:56 decreed that women countrywide had total autonomy over their pregnancy during the first trimester, as it’s a private medical decision made between a woman and her doctor. Speaker 2: However, the court also ruled that the states have an important and legitimate interest in protecting potential life and may limit access to abortion in the second and third trimesters.
3:17 Speaker 1: Dissenters were firm in their beliefs. Justice Rehnquist’s scathing dissent stated that the right to an abortion was not in the constitution and that the fetus’s rights should be protected as well. Believing the court had taken the concept of liberty too far, Rehnquist stated, “Liberty is not guaranteed absolutely against deprivation.
3:37 Only against deprivation without due process of the law.” Abortion remains perhaps America’s most controversial topic across political discourse. Will the Supreme Court revisit the issue? Only time will tell. This was the story of Roe v. Wade. Speaker 2: If you guys feel like you’ve learned something here,
3:59 make sure that you like, you comment, and you subscribe.