Title: Roe v. Wade legal definition of Roe v. Wade
Headings: Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade
Norma McCorvey: The Real Jane Roe
Further readings
Further readings
Cross-references
Fetal Rights; Fetal Tissue Research; Penumbra; "Roe v. Wade" (Appendix, Milestone); Wattleton, Alice Faye.
Roe v. Wade
Opinion of U.S. District Court, N.D. Texas, June 17, 1970 . . . . . . . .499
Briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court
Brief for Appellant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .505
Brief for Appellee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .517
Supplemental Brief for Appellants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .535
Opinion of the Supreme Court, January 22, 1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .542
ISSUE
HOW TO USE MILESTONES IN THE LAW
THIS CASE IN HISTORY
Feedback
Flashcards & Bookmarks ?
References in periodicals archive ?
Legal browser ?
Full browser ?

Content: Both were sworn in as associate justices on January 7, 1971, about a month after the Court had originally heard the arguments in Roe. Chief Justice warren e. burger chose Justice Blackmun—who had served for many years as legal counsel to the Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, Minnesota—to write the Court's original opinion, which Blackmun completed in May 1972. Blackmun's opinion would have struck down the Texas law on the grounds of vagueness, and the result of the opinion would have been that the majority of abortion statutes in the United States would have been unconstitutionally vague as well, though the Court would not have considered whether the right to an abortion was a fundamental right. However, Blackmun also recommended that the Court reconsider the case with all nine justices. Instead of issuing Blackmun's original opinion, the Court decided to rehear the case during the following term. The Court reheard the case beginning October 11, 1972. After the rehearing, the Court, with Blackmun again writing for the majority, found the Texas abortion law to be unconstitutional. It declared that such laws "violate the due process clause, which protects against State Action the right to privacy, including [a] woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy." Rehnquist, a politically conservative justice, wrote a dissenting opinion. In its opinion, the Court ruled that the right to terminate a pregnancy is part of a woman's right to privacy.