Roe v. Wade: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=410 U.S. 113 (1973) |date=January 22, 1973 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from=U.S.D.C., Northern District of T...") |
(Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|appealed_from=U.S.D.C., Northern District of Texas | |appealed_from=U.S.D.C., Northern District of Texas | ||
|case_treatment=No | |case_treatment=No | ||
|facts=A Texas law made abortion illegal except by a doctor’s orders to save the woman’s life. Roe (fictitious name) lived in Dallas County, Texas. | |facts=A Texas law made abortion illegal except by a doctor’s orders to save the woman’s life. Roe (fictitious name) lived in Dallas County, Texas. | ||
|procedural_history=Roe filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas. | |procedural_history=Roe filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas. | ||
|issues=*Whether the Constitution recognize a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion. | |issues=*Whether the Constitution recognize a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion. | ||
*Whether mootness applies to situations which are inherently short enough that they will not reach the court by the time they have been resolved. | *Whether mootness applies to situations which are inherently short enough that they will not reach the court by the time they have been resolved. | ||
|holding=*Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines the right to privacy, which protects a woman's choice re: abortion. Texas criminal abortion statutes are unconstitutional. | |holding=*Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines the right to privacy, which protects a woman's choice re: abortion. Texas criminal abortion statutes are unconstitutional. | ||
*Not a moot question; it is a repeatable circumstance. | *Not a moot question; it is a repeatable circumstance. | ||
|rule=Pregnancy provides a classic justification for a conclusion of nonmootness, because it is truly capable of repetition, yet evading review. | |rule=Pregnancy provides a classic justification for a conclusion of nonmootness, because it is truly capable of repetition, yet evading review. | ||
|comments=When Roe filed the suit, she was in her first trimester of pregnancy and seeking an abortion. When the case finally made it to the Supreme Court, she was no longer pregnant. | |comments=When Roe filed the suit, she was in her first trimester of pregnancy and seeking an abortion. When the case finally made it to the Supreme Court, she was no longer pregnant. | ||
''Roe'' was over-ruled in June 2022 in the ''[[Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization]]''. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/ | |link=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/ | ||
| Line 37: | Line 27: | ||
|opinion_type=concurrence | |opinion_type=concurrence | ||
|written_by=Warren E. Burger | |written_by=Warren E. Burger | ||
}}{{Court opinion part | }}{{Court opinion part | ||
|opinion_type=concurrence | |opinion_type=concurrence | ||
|written_by=William O. Douglas | |written_by=William O. Douglas | ||
}}{{Court opinion part | }}{{Court opinion part | ||
|opinion_type=concurrence | |opinion_type=concurrence | ||
|written_by=Potter Stewart | |written_by=Potter Stewart | ||
}}{{Court opinion part | }}{{Court opinion part | ||
|opinion_type=dissent | |opinion_type=dissent | ||
| Line 53: | Line 40: | ||
|opinion_type=dissent | |opinion_type=dissent | ||
|written_by=William H. Rehnquist | |written_by=William H. Rehnquist | ||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 14:56, June 24, 2022
| Roe v. Wade | |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 410 U.S. 113 (1973) |
| Date decided | January 22, 1973 |
| Appealed from | U.S.D.C., Northern District of Texas |
| Overturned by | |
| Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization | |
| Partially Overturned by | |
| Planned Parenthood v. Casey | |
| Case Opinions | |
| majority | written by Harry Blackmun joined by Warren E. Burger, William O. Douglas, William J. Brennan, Jr., Potter Stewart, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr. |
| concurrence | written by Warren E. Burger |
| concurrence | written by William O. Douglas |
| concurrence | written by Potter Stewart |
| dissent | written by Byron R. White joined by William H. Rehnquist |
| dissent | written by William H. Rehnquist |
Facts
A Texas law made abortion illegal except by a doctor’s orders to save the woman’s life. Roe (fictitious name) lived in Dallas County, Texas.
Procedural History
Roe filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas.
Issues
- Whether the Constitution recognize a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion.
- Whether mootness applies to situations which are inherently short enough that they will not reach the court by the time they have been resolved.
Holding
- Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines the right to privacy, which protects a woman's choice re: abortion. Texas criminal abortion statutes are unconstitutional.
- Not a moot question; it is a repeatable circumstance.
Rule
Pregnancy provides a classic justification for a conclusion of nonmootness, because it is truly capable of repetition, yet evading review.
Comments
When Roe filed the suit, she was in her first trimester of pregnancy and seeking an abortion. When the case finally made it to the Supreme Court, she was no longer pregnant.
Roe was over-ruled in June 2022 in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
