ROE V. WADE(罗诉韦德案)
In 1969, a 25-year-old pregnant single woman Norma McCorvey Burger the pseudonym Jane Roe" brought a class action challenging the constitutionality of the Texas criminal abortion laws which proscribe procuring or attempting an abortion except on medical advice for the purpose of saving the mother's life. Ms McCorvey first filed the case in 1969.She was pregnant with her third child and claimed that she had been raped. But the case was rejected and she was forced to give birth. However, in 1973 her appeal made it to the US Supreme Court where she was represented by Sarah Weddingtona Dallas attorney.
State criminal abortion law like those involved here that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which protects against state action the right to privacy including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy Though the State cannot override that right it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the women approach to term.
The court issued its decision on January 22 1973 with a 7-to-2 majority vote in favor of McCorvey Burger and Douglas concurring opinion and White's dissenting opinion were issued separately. in the companion case of Doe Bolton. By a vote of seven to two, the court justices ruled that governments lacked the power to prohibit abortions.
The court's judgement was based on the decision that a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy came under the freedom of personal choice in family matters as protected by the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. 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 Courts ruling.
While Alito’s draft opinion doesn’t cater much to Roberts’ views, portions of it seem intended to address the specific interests of other justices. One passage argues that social attitudes toward out-of-wedlock pregnancies “have changed drastically” since the 1970s and that increased demand for adoption makes abortion less necessary.“Why don’t the safe haven laws take care of that problem?” asked Barrett, who adopted two of her seven children.