Roe v. Wade, in this landmark Jane Roe, sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion because she had been raped. However, Texas law prohibited abortion, except to save the woman’s life. Roe sought an injunction against the state attorney from Texas arguing that abortion laws are unconstitutional. The question, in this case, was if the Constitution embrace a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy by abortion? The Supreme Court decided on Jan 22, 1973, that a woman’s abortion rights fell within the right to privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut) therefore protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. A second reason for the decision was that the procedure was no longer placed women’s life is “serious jeopardy” thanks to modern medicine. The ruling affected the law of 46 states, giving women total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester.
In this case, reproductive rights meant having the legal right to get an abortion. However, the umbrella of reproductive rights covers a lot more. It includes the right to choose when and if to have children. The right to the means that allow you to plan when and if you have children. The right to sexual and reproductive health care. Unfortunately, reproductive rights are not equally recognized more so now that they are under attack in the United States. The court in Roe v. Wade decided that women could not be denied reproductive rights considering “the ninth amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” For me, the court felt that the choice of the word “person” stopped them from legally taking a woman’s reproductive rights. This could change very soon. As one of the activists in “She’s Beautiful When She’s Angry” said, “some victories are not permanent.” We must keep fighting to maintain the rights that many have fought so hard for us to have today.
I definitely agree that we have to keep fighting to keep these rights because with the way the world is today, abortion might once again become illegal. The right to choose what to do with ones own body is extremely important and should never be questioned or disallowed by others. It is that persons own choice.
I like it how you captured important things that are issues as well within Roe decision. I think it is truly Landmark. The decision’s reasoning is very weak, hence I think there are attempts to overrule it, to change something in the decision itself or question it. The root question that becomes the core of all abortion court decisions, is not answered in Roe, and it is the biggest weakness of it. The core question is, “When does life begin?”. The court is powerless to answer it, and the decision becomes a “satisfying compromise” between those who think that abortion is a murder and those who think that it’s women’s bodies, rights for Privacy and Equality. The way Court identifies these views as “rigid” strikes me every time I think about the reasoning of Roe. Abortion in the first trimester allowed in the decision truly serves the interests of the society of the 1970s, but lack of medical support ( mainly) makes it so easy to argue. I have to admit that the 14th Amendment is interpreted with its use of the timeframe in this case, too. In my opinion, I join the decision but have a concurring opinion about the reasoning and do dissent with Texas laws not to mention more recent laws in the Southern states like Alabama.
Rosa, I really liked the summary that you provided of Roe v. Wade. I completely agree with you that we have to continue fighting to maintain these rights that have such an important impact on so many women. We briefly talked about abortion in the beginning of this course and while it is important that not every woman will get an abortion during her life, I strongly believe that every woman should have the right to make that decision for themselves. It is incredibly frustrating that a group of mostly old, white, and rich men are making decisions that deeply affect women. It is important to keep in mind that as some legislators in certain states are trying to make it more difficult for women to obtain and abortion, this will not eliminate abortions, but rather only make them for dangerous and unsafe for women in general.
Title XIX of the Social Security Act allowed the creation of the Medicaid program in 1965 for people who have financial need to receive federal financial assistance for certain medical treatments. However, in 1976, Congress also passed similar versions of the Hyde Amendment (which prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortion unless the reason is to save the live of a woman or the cause of pregnancy is either incest or rape). These similar versions of legislative provisions limited the use of federal funds under Medicaid to reimburse abortion costs. A Medicaid recipient, Cora McRae, who needed an abortion sued the Secretary of Health and Human Services at that time, Patricia R. Harris because she questioned the “constitutional validity of the Hyde Amendment.” The question for this case is if this Hyde Amendment violated the right to privacy, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Due Process Clause specifically in the fifth amendment looks at federal action while the due process clause in the 14th amendment looks at state action. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is used here because McRae argued that the Hyde Amendment violated the establishment clause, which prohibits laws to favor a religion over another (or vice versa). The Court said that states who had Medicaid programs did not have to provide funds to reimburse abortion costs. They stated that poverty was not protected under the Equal Protections Clause/Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. They also stated that it was only a coincidence between the funding restrictions and the beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church so there is no favoritism of a religion over another.
The decision for this case is absolutely terrible. With Roe v. Wade, which protects a woman’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, the decision for Harris v. McRae is a million steps behind society’s progression towards equality. This decision ultimately makes it harder for women to actually get an abortion because many of them may not have the financial means for it. What use is the decision for Roe v. Wade if women do not have the resources to actually get one if they need one? This decision practically legitimizes the financial and social inequalities for women; it completely ignores the autonomy for women, especially if they make little to no income. For the definition of reproductive rights, each state has its own laws and restrictions, so there is no definitive meaning for it. In each jurisdiction, there’s always some law about abortion, the use of contraceptives, and family planning, so women throughout the entire country has no strong standing in what they can do with their own body due to this rules. It’s basically creating this grey area that allows white men to control women’s bodies with the excuse of being pro-life. One woman can be pro-life with her own choices but no man and no other woman has a right to assert what another woman can do.
Facts: Roe sought out to terminate her pregnancy which was the result of a rape. At the time, Texas law only allowed women to get abortion, if their life was at risk. Roe’s attorney could not find the constitutional hook of her argument.
Question: Does the constitution embrace a women to an abortion?
Conclusion: They found that a women’s right when it comes to an abortion was under the right to privacy which is protected by the 14th amendment.
In Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey was pregnant due to a rape in Dallas, Texas. She did not want to go through with pregnancy so sought out for an abortion. In the states of Texas, they did not allow abortion unless the mother’s life was in jeopardy. McCorvey took her issue to the court. In order for her identity to remain anonyms, she went under the name Jane Roe and sought an injunction against the state attorney Henry Wade. The supreme court ruled by a 7-2 vote, that the ban on abortion was unconstitutional. The opinion by justice Blackmun stated that the right of privacy as stated in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, women had the right to terminate a pregnancy. The question of this case was, is a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy with a abortion embraced under the constitution. It was stated that the Fourteenth amendment right protected the women. The conclusion in Roe’s case gave women the right to self-govern their pregnancy during the first trimester. This ruling affected many states.
In the Roe case it did make me view the law on abortion. Why was it that only women who’s lives were at steak only allowed to get abortions? In Roe’s case this was a rape, which is a hard and also traumatizing ordeal to go through. Why would that want to have someone that conceived due to a rape go through the pregnancy? Also why was this not always a matter of a women’s privacy what goes on with her body?
Burwell v Hobby Lobby was brought to the Supreme Court by the christian family who owns Hobby Lobby, a for-profit corporation. They claimed that by requiring employment based insurance plans to include contraceptives, which are against christian faith, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and further infringed on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The court decided that yes, in fact it does, and therefore religion can excuse corporations from providing certain types of healthcare to their employees
The decision is problematic because it gives corporations deciding power in the healthcare of its employees, based on religious freedom, which is such a very broad category. Ruth Bader Ginsberg for example said that the case could affect the decision of a case in which an employee needs a blood transfusion. In other words, religious beliefs are sometimes in conflict with medical procedures even more critical than contraceptives. The decision is also significant because it grants corporations the religious freedoms guaranteed to citizens. In terms of women’s rights, it adapts for contemporary law the long standing gender discrimination normalized in religions such as Puritans. In addition, because it changes the guarantees of the affordable care act, the people most disadvantaged by the decision are lower class women, which also reflects a theme of The Crucible.
Harris V McRae was a Supreme Court case in 1980 which upheld the Hyde amendment.
Facts/Question: McRae was a Medicaid patient who was trying to have an abortion. She was denied federal reimbursment because her pregnancy did not threaten her life. McRae argued that she was indigent, making the abortion medically necessary
Holding/Rule: The court upheld the Hyde Amendment
Reasoning: The Hyde amendment does not violate the fifth amendment as it did not create an obstacle to the choice to have an abortion. It does not violate the first amendment as the Hyde amendment embodies traditional values. It did not violate due process as poverty alone is not a medically necessary reason for an abortion.
The court, in this case, denied the opportunity for an individual to have an abortion. Given that it is a costly procedure and most abortions are not done with the physical health of the patient at stake, the court is essentially denying the majority of women from their right to an abortion. By not reimbursing abortions with federal funds, the federal government is refusing to acknowledge the right that they put in place. In this context, “reproductive rights” means making the act of an abortion legal without providing the necessary funding to have one done. This ruling creates advantages for the wealthy. Women who can afford an abortion with personal funds are able to move on and continue to climb the social ladder. Women who cannot afford an abortion are forced to have the child which essentially locks them in a cycle of poverty. Additionally, this ruling incentivizes underground abortions, which can be less costly financially but create major health complications and can lead to death.
In Roe V Wade, the case for abortion is argued at the Supreme Court. The Supreme Courts decision was 7-2 in favour of abortion. The reason for upholding the right for abortion is mainly based on the fourth amendment which allows Women both the freedom to bear children as well as to terminate their pregnancies if they so deem. Roe v Wade also upheld the former Griswald case which allowed for late term pregnancies. In the case of Roe V Wade they were also able to overturn state laws which required women in states such as Georgia to go through an extensive process in order to obtain an abortion and only when her life was at stake.
Roe V Wade is one of this countries defining court cases on the matter of abortion, it has been used in defending women’s right to abortion to date, however due to challenges on this law as well as states right, the right to legal abortion is becoming harder and harder with some states having only one legal abortion clinic. Another barrier for the rights of women is the cost of abortions, many have argued for healthcare to pay for abortion however religious backlash has prevented these polices from passing. The problem with not letting healthcare pay for abortions is that Women who can’t afford to have the procedure will now somehow have to find the money to raise a child on. Unfortunately today Roe V Wade is still under attack and has become a serious partisan issue.
Email us at [email protected] so we can respond to your questions and requests. Please email from your CUNY email address if possible. Or visit our help site for more information:
Roe v. Wade, in this landmark Jane Roe, sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion because she had been raped. However, Texas law prohibited abortion, except to save the woman’s life. Roe sought an injunction against the state attorney from Texas arguing that abortion laws are unconstitutional. The question, in this case, was if the Constitution embrace a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy by abortion? The Supreme Court decided on Jan 22, 1973, that a woman’s abortion rights fell within the right to privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut) therefore protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. A second reason for the decision was that the procedure was no longer placed women’s life is “serious jeopardy” thanks to modern medicine. The ruling affected the law of 46 states, giving women total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester.
In this case, reproductive rights meant having the legal right to get an abortion. However, the umbrella of reproductive rights covers a lot more. It includes the right to choose when and if to have children. The right to the means that allow you to plan when and if you have children. The right to sexual and reproductive health care. Unfortunately, reproductive rights are not equally recognized more so now that they are under attack in the United States. The court in Roe v. Wade decided that women could not be denied reproductive rights considering “the ninth amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” For me, the court felt that the choice of the word “person” stopped them from legally taking a woman’s reproductive rights. This could change very soon. As one of the activists in “She’s Beautiful When She’s Angry” said, “some victories are not permanent.” We must keep fighting to maintain the rights that many have fought so hard for us to have today.
I definitely agree that we have to keep fighting to keep these rights because with the way the world is today, abortion might once again become illegal. The right to choose what to do with ones own body is extremely important and should never be questioned or disallowed by others. It is that persons own choice.
I like it how you captured important things that are issues as well within Roe decision. I think it is truly Landmark. The decision’s reasoning is very weak, hence I think there are attempts to overrule it, to change something in the decision itself or question it. The root question that becomes the core of all abortion court decisions, is not answered in Roe, and it is the biggest weakness of it. The core question is, “When does life begin?”. The court is powerless to answer it, and the decision becomes a “satisfying compromise” between those who think that abortion is a murder and those who think that it’s women’s bodies, rights for Privacy and Equality. The way Court identifies these views as “rigid” strikes me every time I think about the reasoning of Roe. Abortion in the first trimester allowed in the decision truly serves the interests of the society of the 1970s, but lack of medical support ( mainly) makes it so easy to argue. I have to admit that the 14th Amendment is interpreted with its use of the timeframe in this case, too. In my opinion, I join the decision but have a concurring opinion about the reasoning and do dissent with Texas laws not to mention more recent laws in the Southern states like Alabama.
Rosa, I really liked the summary that you provided of Roe v. Wade. I completely agree with you that we have to continue fighting to maintain these rights that have such an important impact on so many women. We briefly talked about abortion in the beginning of this course and while it is important that not every woman will get an abortion during her life, I strongly believe that every woman should have the right to make that decision for themselves. It is incredibly frustrating that a group of mostly old, white, and rich men are making decisions that deeply affect women. It is important to keep in mind that as some legislators in certain states are trying to make it more difficult for women to obtain and abortion, this will not eliminate abortions, but rather only make them for dangerous and unsafe for women in general.
Title XIX of the Social Security Act allowed the creation of the Medicaid program in 1965 for people who have financial need to receive federal financial assistance for certain medical treatments. However, in 1976, Congress also passed similar versions of the Hyde Amendment (which prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortion unless the reason is to save the live of a woman or the cause of pregnancy is either incest or rape). These similar versions of legislative provisions limited the use of federal funds under Medicaid to reimburse abortion costs. A Medicaid recipient, Cora McRae, who needed an abortion sued the Secretary of Health and Human Services at that time, Patricia R. Harris because she questioned the “constitutional validity of the Hyde Amendment.” The question for this case is if this Hyde Amendment violated the right to privacy, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Due Process Clause specifically in the fifth amendment looks at federal action while the due process clause in the 14th amendment looks at state action. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is used here because McRae argued that the Hyde Amendment violated the establishment clause, which prohibits laws to favor a religion over another (or vice versa). The Court said that states who had Medicaid programs did not have to provide funds to reimburse abortion costs. They stated that poverty was not protected under the Equal Protections Clause/Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. They also stated that it was only a coincidence between the funding restrictions and the beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church so there is no favoritism of a religion over another.
The decision for this case is absolutely terrible. With Roe v. Wade, which protects a woman’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, the decision for Harris v. McRae is a million steps behind society’s progression towards equality. This decision ultimately makes it harder for women to actually get an abortion because many of them may not have the financial means for it. What use is the decision for Roe v. Wade if women do not have the resources to actually get one if they need one? This decision practically legitimizes the financial and social inequalities for women; it completely ignores the autonomy for women, especially if they make little to no income. For the definition of reproductive rights, each state has its own laws and restrictions, so there is no definitive meaning for it. In each jurisdiction, there’s always some law about abortion, the use of contraceptives, and family planning, so women throughout the entire country has no strong standing in what they can do with their own body due to this rules. It’s basically creating this grey area that allows white men to control women’s bodies with the excuse of being pro-life. One woman can be pro-life with her own choices but no man and no other woman has a right to assert what another woman can do.
Facts: Roe sought out to terminate her pregnancy which was the result of a rape. At the time, Texas law only allowed women to get abortion, if their life was at risk. Roe’s attorney could not find the constitutional hook of her argument.
Question: Does the constitution embrace a women to an abortion?
Conclusion: They found that a women’s right when it comes to an abortion was under the right to privacy which is protected by the 14th amendment.
In Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey was pregnant due to a rape in Dallas, Texas. She did not want to go through with pregnancy so sought out for an abortion. In the states of Texas, they did not allow abortion unless the mother’s life was in jeopardy. McCorvey took her issue to the court. In order for her identity to remain anonyms, she went under the name Jane Roe and sought an injunction against the state attorney Henry Wade. The supreme court ruled by a 7-2 vote, that the ban on abortion was unconstitutional. The opinion by justice Blackmun stated that the right of privacy as stated in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, women had the right to terminate a pregnancy. The question of this case was, is a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy with a abortion embraced under the constitution. It was stated that the Fourteenth amendment right protected the women. The conclusion in Roe’s case gave women the right to self-govern their pregnancy during the first trimester. This ruling affected many states.
In the Roe case it did make me view the law on abortion. Why was it that only women who’s lives were at steak only allowed to get abortions? In Roe’s case this was a rape, which is a hard and also traumatizing ordeal to go through. Why would that want to have someone that conceived due to a rape go through the pregnancy? Also why was this not always a matter of a women’s privacy what goes on with her body?
Burwell v Hobby Lobby was brought to the Supreme Court by the christian family who owns Hobby Lobby, a for-profit corporation. They claimed that by requiring employment based insurance plans to include contraceptives, which are against christian faith, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and further infringed on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The court decided that yes, in fact it does, and therefore religion can excuse corporations from providing certain types of healthcare to their employees
The decision is problematic because it gives corporations deciding power in the healthcare of its employees, based on religious freedom, which is such a very broad category. Ruth Bader Ginsberg for example said that the case could affect the decision of a case in which an employee needs a blood transfusion. In other words, religious beliefs are sometimes in conflict with medical procedures even more critical than contraceptives. The decision is also significant because it grants corporations the religious freedoms guaranteed to citizens. In terms of women’s rights, it adapts for contemporary law the long standing gender discrimination normalized in religions such as Puritans. In addition, because it changes the guarantees of the affordable care act, the people most disadvantaged by the decision are lower class women, which also reflects a theme of The Crucible.
Harris V McRae was a Supreme Court case in 1980 which upheld the Hyde amendment.
Facts/Question: McRae was a Medicaid patient who was trying to have an abortion. She was denied federal reimbursment because her pregnancy did not threaten her life. McRae argued that she was indigent, making the abortion medically necessary
Holding/Rule: The court upheld the Hyde Amendment
Reasoning: The Hyde amendment does not violate the fifth amendment as it did not create an obstacle to the choice to have an abortion. It does not violate the first amendment as the Hyde amendment embodies traditional values. It did not violate due process as poverty alone is not a medically necessary reason for an abortion.
The court, in this case, denied the opportunity for an individual to have an abortion. Given that it is a costly procedure and most abortions are not done with the physical health of the patient at stake, the court is essentially denying the majority of women from their right to an abortion. By not reimbursing abortions with federal funds, the federal government is refusing to acknowledge the right that they put in place. In this context, “reproductive rights” means making the act of an abortion legal without providing the necessary funding to have one done. This ruling creates advantages for the wealthy. Women who can afford an abortion with personal funds are able to move on and continue to climb the social ladder. Women who cannot afford an abortion are forced to have the child which essentially locks them in a cycle of poverty. Additionally, this ruling incentivizes underground abortions, which can be less costly financially but create major health complications and can lead to death.
In Roe V Wade, the case for abortion is argued at the Supreme Court. The Supreme Courts decision was 7-2 in favour of abortion. The reason for upholding the right for abortion is mainly based on the fourth amendment which allows Women both the freedom to bear children as well as to terminate their pregnancies if they so deem. Roe v Wade also upheld the former Griswald case which allowed for late term pregnancies. In the case of Roe V Wade they were also able to overturn state laws which required women in states such as Georgia to go through an extensive process in order to obtain an abortion and only when her life was at stake.
Roe V Wade is one of this countries defining court cases on the matter of abortion, it has been used in defending women’s right to abortion to date, however due to challenges on this law as well as states right, the right to legal abortion is becoming harder and harder with some states having only one legal abortion clinic. Another barrier for the rights of women is the cost of abortions, many have argued for healthcare to pay for abortion however religious backlash has prevented these polices from passing. The problem with not letting healthcare pay for abortions is that Women who can’t afford to have the procedure will now somehow have to find the money to raise a child on. Unfortunately today Roe V Wade is still under attack and has become a serious partisan issue.