This Case Commentary is written by Girraj Sharma, a Third-Year Law Student of Jaipur national university

Case details:

Title – Roe v. Wade

Citation – 410 U.S. 113

Year – 1973

Court – The Supreme court of United States

Bench – 9 Judges

Majority Opinion– Harry Blackmun (Author of Majority opinion), Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justices Potter Stewart, William J. Brennan Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, and Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Dissent – Justices William Rehnquist and Byron White

Issue – Right to privacy and Women’s Right to abortion, Bodily integrity, and Human Dignity

Introduction:

The right to abortion has been a very controversial topic and the focal point of numerous debates. Should a woman have the right to choose an abortion, or does an unborn child have the right to life? These questions have been cantered of debates for decades and were answered in landmark Roe v. Wade judgment. This crucial case examined whether a woman can seek an abortion even without any medical necessity or if an unborn fetus has the right to life. Roe v. Wade is a landmark judgment that changed the abortion rights of a woman in the USA. This case remains one of the most controversial cases decided by the US Supreme Court because in this case it was held that women have the constitutional right to abortion and an unborn fetus is not a person recognized under the constitution, and therefore, the unborn is not entitled to rights. This article will examine the Roe v. Wade case and its profound impact on abortion rights in the United States.

Facts of the case:

The case was initiated by Norma McCorvey (appellant), also referred to as Jane Roe in court documents, against Henry Wade, the Dallas County District Attorney (respondent). Roe was a pregnant woman residing in Texas. She challenged the constitutionality of Texas laws, which prohibit abortion except performed to save a mother's life. Since Roe wanted to terminate her pregnancy, according to Texas laws, she was not allowed to have an abortion of her own choice without any medical emergency. In the U.S., the abortion laws varied from state to state at that time, with some states allowing abortion, but Roe was not financially capable of moving to a different state and having an abortion. As a result, she approached the Court for the Northern District of Texas (district court), seeking an injunction against Henry Wade.

The decision was held in favor of Roe by the U.S. District Court. The court declared the Texas laws unconstitutional and void since they violate the right to privacy under the ninth and fourteenth amendments. The court granted declaratory relief but refused to grant an injunction. Both parties appealed before the United States Court of Appeals. Appellant Roe appealed for an injunction, and respondent Wade appealed against the declaratory relief.

Issues of the case:

· Whether the U.S. Constitution recognizes that woman's right to abortion falls under her right to privacy?

· Whether the right to abortion is an absolute right granted to women, and to what extent the state can interfere in that?

Judgment:

January 1973 proved to bring an important change in the Constitution of the United States.

With the 7:2 opinions, women’s right to privacy were recognized under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. In disagreement with the Texas law against abortion, the court held that the ambit of ‘Right to Privacy’ includes the Right to Abortion and thus is within the framework of the fundamental rights.

The court opined that despite the absence of direct mention of the right to privacy in the constitution it can very well be derived from the ‘Right to Liberty’ guarantee of the Due Process clause mentioned in the Fourteenth Amendment. The court in its judgment mentioned the historical traces of ‘Right to Privacy’ in the 1981 case of Union Pacific R. Co. vs. Botsford [1], whereby the court recognized the right of personal privacy, or a zone of privacy, to exist under the Constitution.

This landmark judgment prevents forceful continuation of the pregnancy of a woman against her own will. It was opined that right to privacy includes right to abortion providing all rights to a woman to choose to have an abortion.

The argument by the respondent (Henry Wade, District Attorney of Dallas County, Texas) that the law against abortion upholds the rights of the fetus, who shall be recognized as a person under the constitution, was rejected by the court. In contrast it was held that the U.S. constitution since does not define the term “person,” the state thereby does not recognize the unborn as a person and hence, no rights shall be attributed to an unborn. Emphasizing that any sort of rights is only provided to born or naturalized persons.

Being thoughtful of the extremity, the appellant’s argument stating right to abortion as an absolute right was also discarded. The court put duty on the State to apply reasonable restrictions or regulations on abortion to ensure smooth functioning of the society, thus, implementing a ‘Trimester Framework,’ to balance a women’s right to privacy, with the State’s interest in regulating abortions. The court divided the nine-month pregnancy into 3 trimesters, as following –

First trimester – Abortion in the very first trimester was to solely depend on the choice of woman and her right to abortion prevails provided that the abortion will be performed by a licensed doctor in a medically appropriate condition.

Second trimester – The state was given the power to interfere and regulate abortion by reasonable restrictions concerned with the health of the pregnant women.

Third trimester –In the very final i.e. the third trimester, the fetus is considered to become ‘viable,’ It falls in State’s interest to prioritize safeguarding human life over another’s right to privacy. At this stage, the State can completely prohibit abortion except in situations where is it deemed essential to preserve the woman’s life and health.

Dissenting Opinions:

Justice Byron White criticized the court for not considering he limits set by the constitution. He opined that providing a right not explicitly mention within the constitution is beyond judicial power. He stood with the opinion that the issue of abortion is something that should be determined through democratic processes, allowing individual states to make their own decisions regarding the legality of the matter and public will.

Justice Rehnquist, on the other hand, argued that abortion is universally controversial topic and these rights were not recognized globally, and resultantly, the issue of privacy was not fundamentally relevant to this particular case.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization[1] (2022)

Roe v. Wade was overruled by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in 2022 by the U.S. Supreme Court. This was brought by the Jackson Women’s Health Organization challenging the Mississippi law called the “Gestational Age Act,” which prohibited all abortions, with few exceptions, after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

In this case, the Supreme Court of the United States took away the right to abortion, ruling that the right to abortion is not a constitutional right.

Conclusion:

Roe v. Wade was historically a landmark judgment, not just for the US courts but the courts worldwide. It affected the social, legal, and political framework of reproductive rights in the States. In this case, the court decided that the right to abortion is protected under the e right to privacy guaranteed to the women as a citizen under the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This case eventually laid the foundation for many cases regarding reproductive rights but was overruled in the year 2022 by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Now in the current legal outlook, the United States does not recognize abortion as a constitutional right, yet again creating a nationwide agitation and debate.

References:

1. Roe v. Wade : a case analysis on providing adequate constitutional protection https://blog.ipleaders.in/roe-v-wade-case-analysis-providing-adequate-constitutional- protection/#Contentions_raised_by_parties

2. Roe v. Wade | Case Brief for Law School

3. Roe vs. Wade https://privacylibrary.ccgnlud.org/case/roe-vs- wade#:~:text=Case%20Brief&text=The%20Court%20recognised%20that%20the,mig ht%20have%20in%20regulating%20abortion.

4. https://reproductiverights.org/roe-v-wade/

________________________

[1] 597 U.S. 215 (2022)