In 1973, the Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade, the court ruled that abortion may be permitted within a certain time frame. The ruling said that states couldn’t prohibit voluntary abortions during the first three months of pregnancy. The decision to terminate the pregnancy should be left up to the woman and her doctor. The Court said that during the remaining six months, however, states may regulate abortion procedures in ways reasonably related to maternal health, and for the final ten weeks may prohibit abortion except where doctors find the life of the mother endangered. The Supreme Court’s decision affected every state in some way or another. Some states with relatively modern abortion laws will require substantial rewriting to conform to the new national standards. Other states with older antiabortion laws must write new laws because the Court’s decision invalidated their preceding court standings. On January 22, 1973 the Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 ruling that abortion is legal in the United States. This decision has brought out many positive and negative views among the citizens.
The Supreme Court’s decision pleased many women’s civil rights activists all over the country. The Court’s decision was considered a major victory on their part. In one article entitled, “Protestants Split On Abortion Edict” the columnists four Protestants to debate the Court’s ruling. Two were in agreement with the decision and the other two were in direct opposition to the courts ruling. The two that were pro-abortion stated their delight in the decision, “I am delighted, this is a landmark relation to women’s right, I feel very good about the grounds on which the courts made the decision, that is, standing against violation of privacy and personal liberties of the state.” (Wright, Washington Post).
The Term Paper on The Abortion Controversy Supreme Court
Today few debates in American politics and society are as complex as the debate over abortion. The question of abortion encompasses many different issues, from the biological question of when life begins to the social question of the quality of an unwanted child's life; from the legal question of whether some, not all, abortions should be outlawed to the ethical question of whether a rape victim ...
In another article, the Women’s National Abortion Action Coalition pronounces their enthusiasm with the court’s ruling. They proclaim that “because of the Supreme Court’s ruling hundreds of thousands of women will be spared the medical risks and emotional horrors of back-street and self-induced abortions.” (Barker, Washington Post).
A high -ranking official in the organization said, “the court’s ruling that an unborn fetus is not a person blows the rights of the fetus argument out of the water.”Barker, Washington Post).
In another article entitled “Excerpts from Abortion Case” the Supreme Court Justices discuss their reasoning behind their ruling. “In the majority opinion the Justices say that the Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions the court has recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution.” The justices supported the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people encompassing a woman’s decision to have a baby. The issue of whether or not to bring an unwanted child into this world is a contributing factor as to why the justices ruled in favor of abortion. They claimed “there is the distress for all concerned associated with the unwanted child and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically, and otherwise, to care for it.” (New York Times).
The court also took into consideration the health of the mother, stating that “the now established medical fact that until the end of the first trimester mortality in abortion in less than mortality in normal childbirth.” (New York Times).
These were some of the compelling reason that the Supreme Court Justices ruled in favor of pro-choice laws.
The Supreme Court’s ruling caused many dissenting opinions as well. Many anti-abortion groups claimed that the court’s ruling was outrageous and not expressly written in the Constitution. In one article a spokesmen for the Catholic Church denounced the decision in bitter terms claiming ” that the ruling was an unspeakable tragedy for this nation and a monstrous injustice,” (Randal, Washington Post).
The Essay on Supre Court Abortion Decisions
... abortion. The Supreme Court found this statute unconstitutional because it gave either the parent or a judge absolute veto power over a minors abortion decision, ... discussing the topic of reproductive freedom and The Supreme Courts rulings on these matters ten cases can and must ... Rights Of Women When talking about Supreme Court decisions that have greatly impacted the lives of women it is very hard ...
He went on to add that, “the ruling drastically diminishes the constitutional guarantee of the right to life and in doing so sets in motion developments which are terrifying to contemplate,” (Randal, Washington Post).
Many members of the Catholic Church agreed with this spokesman as well as two Cardinals in particular. Cardinal Cooke and Cardinal Krol added that the Supreme Court has done a monstrous injustice to the thousands of unborn children whose lives may be destroyed as a result of this decision. Cardinal Cooke argued that, “in spite of the horrifying decision the American people must rededicate themselves to the protection of the sacredness of all human life.” (New York Times).
Cardinal Krol claimed that, “the ruling represents bad logic and bad law.” He goes on to say, “there is no rational justification for allowing unrestricted abortion up to the third month of pregnancy; the development of life before and after birth is a continuous process and making the three month point the cut off for unrestricted abortion. The court seems more impressed by magic than by scientific evidence regarding fetal development.” (New York Times).
Not only did the Court’s decision upset Catholics, it upset many other religious denominations. Referencing back to the article involving the debate among the four Protestants who were against this court decision claimed that, “the Supreme Court has decided it knows when human life begins and when it can and cannot be taken with impunity.”(Wright, Washington Post).
The Term Paper on Dihonour Of Cheque Supreme Court Of India Ruling
Second or successive dishonour of the cheque :New of Supreme Court Ruling The Supreme Court has overruled its own judgment regarding the law on bounced cheques. The Supreme Court as well as high courts have been following the wrong judgment in several cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Now it has turned the law around. In this case, the payee did not issue notice to the drawer when the ...
They thought this was more than anybody knew and could afford to decide so arbitrarily. They went on further to say that this could represent a cheapening of human life, which in turn could cause serious consequences in the future.
In another article Dr. William Collition,Chairman of the Maryland Human Life Commission, likened the ruling to the Dred Scott decision, which held that the black man or woman is less than human. The 1973 Supreme Court hasn’t improved one bit according to Dr. Collition. Collition said anti-abortion groups “will work with more vigor than ever” to win a reversal of the Court’s ruling, (Barker, Washington Post).
One Supreme Court Justice said that the Court values the pregnant mother more than the development and existence of the life or potential life which she carries (New York Times).
Many Americans feel that the Court’s ruling poses a potential risk to human existence.
The 1973 Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade, impacted all of America in one way or another. Even though, in the Court’s decision they legalized abortion, in my opinion abortion should be made illegal in most circumstances. My opinion is that no one should have the right to decide who lives or who dies. I feel that every woman should carry her child to full term except in cases such as rape, birth defects, or serious life treating the pregnancy. When the Court’s decision came out many people agreed with these circumstances, though now
they seem obsolete. However, some felt that the Court made the correct decision. They believed that a woman should have the right to choose whether or not she goes through with the pregnancy. In most of the articles they give pros and cons to each side of the argument. Most religious denominations condemned this ruling, where most women’s right groups supported this ruling.
