On January 22, 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States handed down one of, if not the most, controversial decisions in US judicial history. In deciding in favor of the plaintiff in Roe V Wade, the high court effectively nullified almost every existing anti-abortion law on the books for the entire country, and conferred on American citizens the Constitutional Right to an abortion.
After 38 Years, the Abortion Debate is Still Going Strong
Now, 38 years later, the abortion debate is still going strong, with annual marches in Washington as well as all across the country both supporting and condemning the decision. National organizations such as NARAL, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, exist solely to promote a woman’s right to an abortion. Others groups, such as AUL, the American’s United for Life, were founded to oppose the practice.
Pro-Choice activists will argue that a woman should have the right to terminate her pregnancy, as granted in Roe V Wade, up to the moment of viability. This is the time in a pregnancy when a fetus can survive outside the womb, and usually occurs beginning around 5 months into term. Pro-Life activists would counter that, with no outside interference, practically every fetus is viable, in that it will survive unless terminated. Both sides of the argument believe totally in their opinion, thus the ongoing controversy.
With the recent landslide victories of conservative, (and usually Pro-Life), candidates in the last election cycle, many Pro-Choice people are gearing up for what they believe will be a legislative onslaught of new abortion laws. At the same time, many Pro-Life people are hoping for exactly that to happen.
Some May Question the Constitutional Legality of Roe v Wade
Religious beliefs aside, many strict Constitutional constructionists would argue, correctly or not, that one of the most contentious aspects of Roe V Wade is that the Supreme Court cited a “Right to Privacy” found either in the Ninth Amendment or the Fourteenth, as grounds for the right to an abortion. Strict constructionists point out that a “Right to Privacy” isn’t mentioned in either of these amendments. The Ninth Amendment refers to “other rights retained by the people”, a term so vague as to be meaningless, while the Fourteenth Amendment deals primarily with Reconstruction issues of the era in which it was adopted. These include the Citizenship Clause, which effectively negated The Dred Scott Decision of 1857, the Equal Protection Clause, which was the basis for the Brown V Board of Education case of 1954, which effectively ended segregation, and of course the Due Process Clause, which prevents unlawful search, seizure, or imprisonment of citizens.
As no “Right to Privacy” is mentioned in either of these Amendments, some believe that the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe V Wade is in effect a house of cards, in that it granted one nonexistent right based on another.
Justice William Rehnquist’s Dissenting Opinion Questioned 14th Amendment Basis
Another potential problem with the Fourteenth Amendment basis is, as opposing Justice William Rehnquist mentioned in his dissenting opinion, “To reach it’s result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.”
Rehnquist was referring to the fact that, even though many states and territories had anti-abortion laws in effect at the time of ratification, at no time were they used as a basis for implementing the Fourteenth Amendment. He went on to say, “There apparently was no question concerning the validity of this provision or of any of the other state statutes when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted.”He concluded from this that,“the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the power to legislate with respect to this matter.”
No End in Sight on Roe v Wade Debate
No matter which side of the debate you’re on, whether it’s staunchly Pro-Life or staunchly Pro-Choice, rest assured that even though the Roe V Wade decision happened over 38 years ago, the argument will rage on.
Simply put, neither side is willing to come to a compromise. For the Pro-Choice crowd, it would mean willingly accepting limitations on what they perceive as a fundamental, not to mention, Constitutional, right. And, for the Pro-Life crowd, it would mean willingly allowing a human child to be killed.
The beliefs on both sides of the issue are simply too strongly held for the matter to be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction anytime soon.
Source Materials:
Foes Of Abortion See Opportunity To Make Rules Stricter
Barrett James, Jr. - Barrett James, Jr. is the author of the sci-fi novel, "The Legacy of Balthazar" as well as many self-help articles about the HVAC ...
