The Supreme Court has decided to tear down the historic Roe v Wade decision, according to a first draft majority opinion prepared by Justice Samuel Alito distributed inside the court. The draft ruling is a full-throated, unapologetic rejection of the 1973 judgment that provided federal constitutional protections for abortion rights, as well as the later 1992 case — Planned Parenthood v. Casey — that substantially upheld the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
What is Roe v Wade?
Roe v Wade is the name of the lawsuit that resulted in the famous 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision establishing a constitutional right to abortion in the United States. The majority judgment held that abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy is unconstitutional.
Who were Roe and Wade?
Jane Roe was a pen name for Norma McCorvey, who was 22 years old, unmarried, jobless, and pregnant for the third time when she sought an abortion in Texas in 1969. McCorvey had given birth to a daughter by the time the United States Supreme Court decided in her favor.
Dallas County, Texas’s district attorney was Henry Wade. He was the guy McCorvey sued when she sought the abortion since it was his responsibility to enforce a state statute that prohibited abortion save to save a woman’s life.
Following her death, biographer Joshua Prager stated that McCorvey made a fortune by delivering speeches and publishing books on both sides of the abortion controversy, and that she was trained by both sides. He said she had conflicting opinions about everything, but she was constant on one point: she supported abortion throughout the first trimester.
The Court decision in 1973
The plaintiff claimed that Texas statute was unconstitutionally ambiguous and infringed on her constitutionally protected right to privacy. The Supreme Court was asked if the Constitution recognizes a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy through abortion.
The decision for the 7-2 majority was delivered by Justice Harry Blackmun, who found that it did — albeit that protection had to be balanced against the government’s interests in preserving women’s health and “the potentiality of human life.” The court, which leans conservative, ruled that a woman’s decision to have an abortion within the first three months of her pregnancy must be left up to her and her doctor.
According to a recent Washington Post-ABC News survey, a majority of Americans believe the Supreme Court should maintain Roe v Wade, the landmark decision that established a constitutional right to abortion.
With the Supreme Court ready to abolish the right to abortion, the poll indicates that 54 percent of Americans feel the 1973 Roe v Wade decision should be preserved, while 28 percent say it should be overturned – a roughly 2-to-1 advantage.
In the United States, Roe v Wade is the sole legal protection women have to govern their own bodies.
It Roe is overturned, three things will happens:
- Women will lack access to healthcare and will die or be badly damaged as a result of “back street” abortions. Restricting or making abortion illegal does not prevent them; it only prevents safe abortions.
- Miscarriages will be looked into. When abortion is prohibited, every pregnancy loss must be examined to guarantee that the “crime” of abortion did not occur.
- Abortion will still be available to the wealthy.
My body my choice
If the phrase “my body, my choice” applies to vaccines, it also applies to abortions. The anti-vaccination movement has created false fears and promoted falsehoods about vaccinations. If vaccinations can be used to prevent the spread of disease then why can’t you prevent pregnancy? Just because one is required to obtain a vaccination as a child does not mean that it doesn’t have its dangers for fetuses. It’s time for the anti-abortion crowd to recognize the harsh reality of their position: if they want to make laws dictating how our bodies are treated, they should stop concerning themselves with yours.
In recent years, Republican lawmakers have re-emphasized their anti-abortion stance in order to compete with liberals in the cultural wars. Donald Trump was a perfect example of this electioneering strategy, morphing from a disinterested pro-choicer to an ardent defender of unborn kids virtually overnight. Those of us who have watched with dismay the attempts to introduce punitive heartbeat bills and brutal restrictions in various states, as well as the appointment of two staunch conservative justices, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, to the Supreme Court, will be aware that Roe has been in jeopardy for some time.
Right-wing politicians who believe they have the moral high ground are the principal opponents of Roe and arguments to expand access to abortion beyond the restrictions of “foetal viability.” Instead of exacerbating the schism, pro-choice campaigners must mobilize support from across the political spectrum by calling their opponents’ bluff on the subject of autonomy. If governments should not be permitted to interfere with citizens’ medical decisions during pandemics, why should they be allowed to pry into a pregnant woman’s private medical decisions?
From abortion to woman rights
Regardless of how strictly abortion laws are enforced, access to safe and legal abortion is a fundamental right for all women – no matter where they live, whether they have the money to pay for it, or whether the country where they live allows abortions. It is unsafe, sometimes illegal but always unacceptable for governments to prevent women from having control over their reproductive lives.
Human rights legislation clearly states that decisions concerning your body are solely yours – this is known as bodily autonomy. Forcing someone to continue on an undesired pregnancy or to seek an unsafe abortion violates their human rights, especially their right to privacy and physical autonomy.
In many cases, people who are forced to have unsafe abortions suffer prosecution and punishment, including incarceration, as well as harsh, inhuman, and humiliating treatment and discrimination in, and exclusion from, essential post-abortion health care. Access to abortion is thus critically tied to preserving and defending the human rights of pregnant women, girls, and others, and hence to attaining social and gender justice.
Amnesty International believes that everyone should be able to exercise their bodily autonomy and make their own reproductive decisions, including when and whether to have children. It is critical that abortion regulations respect, protect, and fulfill the human rights of pregnant women rather than forcing them to seek dangerous abortions.
Protesters rally across US after Supreme Court draft leaked
Anger and anguish exploded around the country Tuesday as abortion rights activists took to the streets, from the steps of the Supreme Court to New York, Nevada, Texas, and California, to protest the nation’s top court’s likely decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
While abortion-rights advocates have been warning about the impending decision, which would allow states to outright ban abortions, the leak of a draft ruling endorsed by a majority of justices on Monday night intensified dread and outrage, as demonstrators raised their voices.
Protesters assemble outside the Supreme Court
Ellie Small, 19, and Emma Hearns, 18, of George Washington University took a break from studying for exams earlier in the day to express their concerns outside the Supreme Court. “We are here because it’s a really scary time to be a young woman,” Small said.
Miller, who called the leaked Supreme Court paper a “poor opinion,” said she hoped the discovery would inspire Democrats to fight back, first by “bombing” the filibuster and adopting a measure protecting abortion. “I want the Democrats to do their damn job,” Miller continued.
Pro-life demonstrators demonstrate in Washington, D.C.
Kristin Monahan, 30, an anti-abortion activist, had earlier rallied outside the Supreme Court. She was a self-described feminist, communist, and atheist who was part of a tiny but vociferous group in favour of abortion restrictions.
“I already feel like it makes more sense for people who support pro-peace values – anti-war, vegan, anti-death penalty – it makes more sense for people like that to be against abortion, because abortion is violence, and it’s the mass killing of young human beings,” Monahan said.
“Abortion is oppression,” a woman said through a megaphone. Maggie Donica, 21, who describes herself as anti-abortion, says her main motivation for demonstrating is to give states the authority to decide on abortion.
She described overturning Roe as a “statement of neutrality.” “It restores the states’ authority to make their own judgments.”
More protests are planned around the country.
Hundreds of demonstrators marched through downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday evening, advancing toward Pershing Square. The march looked to spark violence between police and protestors; in reaction to the demonstration, the Los Angeles Police Department announced a city-wide tactical alert, placing all officers on high alert.
Protesters gathered in front of a federal courtroom building downtown in Denver and Reno, Nevada, earlier in the day. Even before the “Rally to Restore Roe” officially began, Rosie Gully, a regional activist with NARAL Pro-Choice, managed to shout herself hoarse.
An overturn of Roe v Wade would be a tragic blow to the U.S. Constitution, and all Americans should stand together in this hour of need to fight for what’s right—the right of every woman in America to get safe and legal abortion. We shouldn’t allow anyone to disrupt, dismantle, or otherwise damage such a fundamental right. Follow Drama Shirt for other news relate to the Roe v Made overturn.