Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Roe v Wade
Transcript of Roe v Wade
"Justice William Rehnquist - Dissent in Roe v. Wade." Endroe.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
“Landmark cases: Roe v Wade.” McBride, Alex. PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
My mind, my body, my choice. Digital image. Global Voices. N.p., 23 Jan. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
Protesting women. Digital image. Justice Watch. Alliance for Justice, 21 Aug. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
"Roe V. Wade - Women's Right to Choose." ClassBrain.com. N.p., 18 Oct. 2011. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
"Roe v. Wade Case Brief Summary." Lawnix. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
"ROE v. WADE." The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012.
Judges on the case Chief justice:
Warren E. Burger
William O. Douglas
William J. Brennan, Jr.
Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun
William H. Rehnquist The case The alias "Jane Roe" was used for Norma McCorvey, a texas resident who sought to terminate her pregnancy through abortion.
Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life.
Roe brought a class action challenging the constitutionality of the laws, claiming that it violated her rights & the rights of other women.
The defendant was county District Atorney Henry B. Wade who argued that Texas had a compelling interest in protecting the unborn life.
Other complainants in the lawsuit included Hallford, a doctor who faced criminal prosecution for violating the state abortion laws & the Does, a married couple with no children, who sought a ban against enforcement of the laws on the grounds that they were unsanctioned. The trial Lasted 3 years
"In every other case, there was something in the Constitution you could point to for support. There, nothing. -Justice Byron White Major constitutional questions Do abortion laws that criminalize all abortions-except those requried on medical advice to save the life of the mother-violate the Constitution of the U.S.?
Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution protect the right to privacy, including the right to have an abortion?
Are there any circumstances where a state may order laws prohibiting abortion? Ruling Vote 7-2
Majority opinion written by Harry Blackmun:
A woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the fourteenth amendment
Dissent William Rehnquist & Byron White:
Nothing in the language or history of the constitution supports the Court's judgement. There was no legitamate complainant-a woman in her first trimester-necessary for the ruling. The assenting court identified a woman's "right to abortion" under the more general "right to privacy." However, the Texas stature prohibited a medical abortion performed by a licensed physician on some client, which is hardly private. My view I agree with the Supreme Court's decision. I believe women have the right to privacy and the right to choose. I would not have changed anything in their ruling. Roe v Wade 1970 410 U.S. 113 Docket # 70-18 Constitutional Amendments Court argued that the constitutions first, fourth, ninth and fourteenth amendments protect an individual's privacy. The supreme court applied the constitution to their side by basing its abortion ruling on the right of personal privacy which the court found obvious in the fourteenth amendment. The dissent argued that there was nothing in the constituion to support the claims. The Roe v Wade case applies to current events in that abortion is always a political hot potato Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court decision protecting a woman's right to choose. It is one of the most controversial decision in Supreme Court History. The decision gave a woman total independence over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third trimesters. As a result, the laws have greatly expanded citizen's rights and affected the laws of 46 states. A divided vote:
It was almost completely unanimous because of the courts strong belief in the constitutional right to privacy. It was partly divided because the dissenters thought it had nothing to do with privacy and they felt they were protecting the lives of the unborn. Side note-the Does and Doctor Hallford had no standing to sue