roe v wade - The Court held that a woman's right to an...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Will Boas Roe v Wade Roe, a Texas resident, sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life. After granting certiorari, the Court heard arguments twice. The first time, Roe's attorney -- Sarah Weddington -- could not locate the constitutional hook of her argument for Justice Potter Stewart. Her opponent -- Jay Floyd -- misfired from the start. Weddington sharpened her constitutional argument in the second round. Her new opponent -- Robert Flowers -- came under strong questioning from Justices Potter Stewart and Thurgood Marshall. Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy 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 of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling. The case does not involve the right to privacy. A womans pregnancy does not fall under that category...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 10/03/2011 for the course POL 142 taught by Professor Jones during the Fall '08 term at Miami University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online