Right to Abortion in the US - Overruled

 

Introduction

‘Abort the child if you do not want to raise it’, is a phrase that is used by people as a casual general statement. Even if impregnation is a natural process, it is up to the discretion of the mother whether he/she/they want/s to proceed with the pregnancy or not. Contraceptives and condoms cannot be entirely relied upon when one indulges in intercourse, to avoid pregnancy. This is because even if these products are used to prevent pregnancy, the fact is that impregnation through intercourse is a natural process and no one has control over it. It may happen or it may not. This is where ‘abortion’ enters the limelight. Abortion is the “Deliberate termination of a human pregnancy performed by medical experts.” In olden times and even today, abortion is not widely accepted by people to be reasonable and there are cases in which the woman is forced to raise the child against her will. The legal aspect of abortion differs from country to country which means that in some countries, abortion is permitted and in some countries, it is not. The judgment of Roe v. Wade was recently overturned by the United States Supreme Court which held that abortion will not be permitted. This article is a case analysis of the judgment which was passed earlier and also the one which recently overturned it. The analysis would cover the legalities of both judgments and also question the reason why a particular judgment was delivered and then the same was overturned during the trial of another case.

 

Facts and Judgment of Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

Jane Roe is the legal pseudonym of Norma McCorvey who was impregnated with her third child in 1969. She wanted to undergo an abortion but was unable to do so as she lived in Texas where abortion was not permitted except in cases where the abortion was necessary to be carried out to save the mother’s life through the legal system of Texas. Sarah. Weddington and Linda Coffee filed a lawsuit on behalf of Jane Roe in U.S. federal court against her local district attorney, Henry Wade, challenging the abortion laws of Texas. The special three–judge bench of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas heard the case and ruled in favour of Jane Roe. The respondents appealed to the Supreme Court as they were not satisfied with the judgment delivered by the district court.

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that “No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property without the due process of law.” In January 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States of America interpreted the Right to Privacy as a part of the Right to Life. This meant that the decision of whether the mother should proceed with the pregnancy or undergo an abortion is solely the decision of the mother and no one else. Right to Privacy plays an important role in the case of pregnancies and abortions as it is only the mother who is responsible for the growth of the child as the fetus develops inside her womb. This is the reason why the Supreme Court in the appeal, ruled in favour of Jane Roe as per the judgment delivered in January 1973. The court also held that even if the Right to Abortion is included in the Right to Privacy as interpreted through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Right to Abortion is not absolute. To make sure that the Right to Abortion is not misused by people, the Court announced a pregnancy trimester timetable to govern all abortion laws in the United States. This announcement meant that the Court also specified up to which trimester or week the pregnancy can be terminated under the guidance of medical professionals. As the Court classified the Right to Abortion as “fundamental”, it required the courts to evaluate challenged abortion laws under the “strict scrutiny” category, the most stringent level of judicial review in the United States.

  

 

Facts and Judgment of Planned Parenthood v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

In Planned Parenthood v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 (1992), the plaintiffs challenged five provisions of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982 which stated that the mother had to give her informed consent before the procedure of abortion to the concerned doctor. This had to be done 24 hours before the abortion. The written consent of the spouse of the woman undergoing the abortion was also mandatory without which the abortion would not be processed. The parental consent of minors who wanted to undergo an abortion was required. The minors had to either produce a written statement from one of the parents or from a guardian in case of absence of parents. Records were kept of the person who wanted to undergo the abortion and also the medical definition drafted under the laws of Pennsylvania was challenged by the plaintiff. The judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff by the Supreme Court of the United States which upheld the right to have an abortion as established in the case of Roe v. Wade and issued its ‘key judgement’ which challenged the imposition of the undue burden standard when evaluating state–imposed restrictions on that right.

 

Facts and Judgment of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization No. 19- 1932 597 U.S. (2022)

The case questioned the constitutionality of a 2018 Mississippi state law which banned most abortion operations after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was the only abortion clinic in Mississippi which sued Thomas E. Dobbs, state health officer with the Mississippi State Department of Health, in March 2018. The lower courts prevented the enforcement of the 2018 Mississippi State law by imposing injunctions based on the judgments delivered in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which had prevented states from banning abortion before the fetal viability generally within the first 24 weeks, on the basis that a woman’s choice for abortion during that period is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. On June 24^th, 2022 the Supreme Court issued a decision by a vote of 6 – 3 that reversed the judgment passed in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The majority held that abortion is not a constitutional right as the Constitution does not mention it and its substantive right was not “deeply rooted” in the country’s history.

 

Inference drawn from the 3 cases

The overturning of the Roe v. Wade judgment was a decision taken by learned lawyers of the United States of America. The decision may result in unwanted pregnancies and the consequences that follow. The privacy of women at large is in jeopardy due to the decision passed by the Supreme Court. I, as a budding lawyer and also a woman believe that it is wrong on the part of the courts to decide whether any woman should continue the pregnancy or not. Misuse of abortion laws is what needs our attention, not the banning of the process entirely. Instead of banning abortion the lawmakers of the country should formulate laws which will prevent the misuse of the abortion laws. Abortion when done at the right time and for the right reason proves to be healthy for the mother as well as others present around her. But if abortions are carried out with ill – intentions then strict action should be taken against them. Banning the process will not yield any result, on the contrary, it may lead to further damage. By damage, I mean that couples will constantly be under pressure to not let the female partner impregnate them while indulging in sexual intercourse. If one is not able to handle this pressure then he/she/they may also suffer from mental illnesses. Sexual intercourse is essential for every person as it is one’s biological need and refraining from it to avoid pregnancies would result in the unfulfillment of one’s mental and physical needs. Hence, it is important to frame laws that will prevent the misuse of abortion and frame a due process to be followed while carrying out the abortion process.

 

Conclusion

Abortion is a decision to be solely taken by the mother of the child as the baby grows inside her and she is majorly involved in bringing the fetus to life. This article aims at drawing an analysis of the three cases involved in the banning of abortion in the United States of America in the past as well as in contemporary times. The analysis throws light on the stringent abortion laws of different countries in the United States of America and questions their constitutionality and relevancy. I do not agree with the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court and I have stated my reasons for the same in the inference part of the article. The courts do not have the right to govern a person’s body and take the decisions attached to it. Abortion when done at the right time and for the right reasons results in the betterment of the woman and is her right which should not be banned by any court of law.

 

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization#:~:text=Dobbs%20v.%20Jackson%20Women%27s%20Health%20Organization%2C%20No.%2019-1392%2C,abortion.%20The%20court%27s%20decision%20overruled%20both%20Roe%20v
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey 
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade