The Supreme Court, Roe
نویسندگان
چکیده
It is no exaggeration to say that no U.S. Supreme Court opinion has been more misunderstood and has had its arguments more misrepresented in the public square than Roe v. Wade (1973). 1 There seems to be a widespread perception that Roe was a moderate opinion that does not support abortion on demand, i.e., unrestricted abortion for all nine months for virtually any reason. Even a philosopher of such erudity as Mortimer Adler did not seem to fully understand the legal implications of Roe: “Mr. Justice Blackmun’s decision in the case of Roe v. Wade invokes the right of privacy, which is nothing but the freedom of an adult woman to do as she pleases with her own body in the first trimester of pregnancy.” 2
منابع مشابه
Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the flight from reason in the Supreme Court.
In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, a bare majority of the Supreme Court reaffirmed Roe v. Wade. Although Roe was not directly implicated by any of the statutes challenged in Casey, all of which could have been upheld without overruling Roe, the Justices agreed to reexamine Roe because of the uncertainty regarding its continued viability and the need to provide guidance...
متن کاملThe Supreme Court and physician-assisted suicide--the ultimate right.
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide later this year whether to let stand decisions by two appeals courts permitting doctors to help terminally ill patients commit suicide. The Ninth and Second Circuit Courts of Appeals last spring held that state laws in Washington and New York that ban assistance in suicide were unconstitutional as applied to doctors and their dying patients. If the Supreme Cou...
متن کاملA study of the right to refuse treatment.
On June 18, 1982, the United States Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in the "right to refuse treatment" case Mills (previously Okin) v. Rogers. I The Su~reme Court stated that the case posed a substantive issue, "a definition of l a] protected constitutional interest, as well as identification ofthe conditions under which competing state interests might outweigh it," and a procedur...
متن کاملState v. New Times, INC (1973)
In the 1973 case State v. New Times, INC, the Arizona Court of Appeals in Phoenix, Arizona, ruled that Arizona Revised Statutes 13-211, 13-212, and 13-213, collectively called the Arizona abortion [3] statutes, were unconstitutional. The statues made it illegal for anyone to receive, provide, or advertise abortion [3] services. The Arizona Court of Appeals reviewed a case in which a city court ...
متن کاملBeal v. Doe (1977)
In the case of Beal v. Doe, decided in 1977, the US Supreme Court ruled that states could constitutionally restrict money from Medicaid from funding elective abortions. After the 1973 case Roe v. Wade [2], in which the US Supreme Court had ruled that women have rights to terminate pregnancies within the first trimester [3], the state of Pennsylvania passed legislation that restricted the use of...
متن کامل