Roe v. Wade (1973)
Parties involved in the suit
Parties involved in the suit Roe, Dr. Hallaford, a married couple with no children. Roe and plaintiffs felt at the time that their constitutional rights were being infringed on limiting their rights to carry out the procedure of an abortion and privacy violations. Texas laws state that it was unlawful to have an abortion only with exception if a mother life was in jeopardy. So Roe along with others filed a class action lawsuit against Wade the county district attorney implying that the law was unconstitutional.
Facts of the cases
In the 60’s, during these times there were no federals laws in place limiting states on abortion rights. In 1971 in the state of Texas it was a crime to have an abortion without it being medically necessary according to their state penal code. Roe who was a single mother who was pregnant could not have an abortion done because of the Texas state laws prohibiting her do so. Roe felt that this was unconstitutional for a state to have power over one’s personal privacy outlawing abortion. Roe was not the only one opposing to fact that this was unconstitutional. Dr.Hallarford who was undergoing pending charges of abortion who intervene with Roe case on abortion and privacy had to explain to the courts that he had pending charges against him at the time for performing abortions against state laws at the time but he as well felt that the state was infringing on his patient privacy act as well. The (does) Marry couple with no children who had they own personal view with possible future failures of contraceptive was a plaintiff as well in this case that agreed with Roe and was allowed to intervene with the case becoming plaintiff but the case was later dismiss without merit. Roe and plaintiffs felt the state was in violation of the 9th amendment that retains individual rights not mentioned for the people and the 14th amendments which explains who is a citizen; prohibits states from abridging privileges or immunities of citizens; tells states to uphold due process and equal protection under law.
Issue before the court was the state laws unconstitutional. Should a state be allowed to limit a women’s ability to terminate pregnancy in the first trimester?
In what trimester should the states be allowed to intervene in one’s pregnancy?
The case was argued December 13, 1971_ _ Reargued October 11, 1972 and the court decided on January 22, 1973 a year and a month later. The supreme court ruled 7-2 that Texas state laws on abortion were unconstitutional and that it violated Roe 9th amendment that retains individual rights not mentioned for the people and the 14th amendments which explains who is a citizen; prohibits states tells states to uphold due process and equal protection under law.
Legal Reasoning for majority Concurring with the majority JUSTICE BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court “we forthwith acknowledge our awareness of the sensitive and emotional nature of the abortion controversy, of the vigorous opposing views, even among physicians, and of the deep and seemingly absolute convictions that the subject inspires. One's philosophy, one's experiences, one's exposure to the raw edges of human existence, one's religious training, one's attitudes toward life and family and their values, and the moral standards one establishes and seeks to observe, are all likely to influence and to color one's thinking and conclusions about