Roe V.Wade Case Brief

Roe v. Wade

Facts: Roe v Wade was a landmark case, quickly becoming one of the most hotly contested court rulings today. “Roe,” the plaintiff, was a single woman who challenged Texas state law prohibiting her to receive an abortion except in the case of a medical emergency. Roe was joined on the plaintiff side by the Does, who also challenged the law as unconstitutional (they were seeking an injunction against enforcement of the state abortion laws) and by Dr. Hallford, a medical professional who, at the time, was fighting charges brought against him for performing abortions.

Procedural History: Prior to hearing Roe v. Wade in 1970, the Supreme Court held two key rulings. The first was Younger v. Harris, which related to the court’s jurisdiction, and the second was US v. Vuitch, in which abortion was narrowly held as a medical procedure on which the doctor has room to determine need. Before making it to the Supreme Court, Roe and Hallford both won their respective cases in a Texas district court, while the Does did not succeed. This prompted the Does to appeal, with Wade following suit with a “cross-appeal.”

Issue: Where is the line between legitimate state interests and a woman’s right to privacy? When does the need for “public health” make performing an abortion illegal?

Holding: The state ruled in favor of Roe, claiming that a woman does indeed have a right to abortion until the third trimester. The court later revised the third trimester limit to until “viability,” meaning until the point the child could survive outside of the womb.

Precedence Set:

1. The Due Process Clause does indeed protect a woman’s right to privacy, and thus protects her right to an abortion, even against a state’s law.

2. The court also found that an abortion law that does not detail regulations down to the trimester and other details is also unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause.

3. Upheld an appeal court decision that just because Roe had her child before the case could be completed, she still has every right to pursue the issue in court.

4. Though the state cannot completely out law abortion, it has valid interests in trying to protect both the mother’s life as well as the potential life inside her.

Reasoning: The large majority of the court’s reasoning, written by Justice Blackmun, originates in a person’s right to privacy under the Fourteenth (and possibly the Ninth, depending on the Justice opinion in question) Amendment. Interestingly enough, in his opinion, Blackmun takes a decent chunk of time to discuss what was seen as “archaic” abortion laws, citing specific ancient attitudes, or even discussing the Hippocratic