What would you like to do?
The 4th Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. An argument was set forth by a Justice that if a state was to impede on a woman who wanted to receive an abortion, that it was an unreasonable seizure against her privacy.
4 people found this useful
Was this answer useful?
Thanks for the feedback!
"Roe" was Norma McCorvey. "Wade" was the DA of Dallas County, Texas. Roe is often used in the same way as Doe, as in John Doe, in lawsuits when the individuals iden…tity is to be protected from the media. For some reason after Doe, the next named used is Roe. ROE ET AL. v. WADE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF DALLAS COUNTY is the longer title. The case in the Texas court was named Jane ROE, Plaintiff, v. Henry WADE, Defendant, v. James Hubert HALLFORD, M.D., Intervenor. John DOE and Mary Doe, Plaintiffs, v. Henry WADE, Defendant.
In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that women do have the right to choose an abortion during the first three months of pregnancy.
There has been an enormous amount of debate over whether Roe V. Wade was a correct ruling by the Supreme Court, however the question asks about the arguments used and this can… be objectively answered. Contrary to popular belief, it was NOT a ruling that the Federal Government should have jurisdiction over abortion, but rather one that said that ANY branch of government would be in violation of the 4th amendment by banning abortion. Although abortion is far too complex an issue for resolving here, the general argument carried in the Roe v. Wade decision was that attempts by any level of government to restrict access to abortion violated a person's 4th Amendment rights by interfering in the private relationship between a patient and a doctor. Even if the argument is accepted that the States have jurisdiction over the matter, the States are still bound by the 4th amendment, and therefore would be prohibited from restricting abortion based upon this ruling. Users are cautioned that this is not an appropriate forum for debating the morality of the issue, nor the "rightness" of the ruling. Such content will be removed and will simply result in a reversion and lock.
Norman McCorvey (Jane Roe)
Jane Roe, whose real name is Norma McCorvey, had three children. The first, by her husband Woody McCorvey, was allegedly kidnapped, then later adopted, by Norma's mother when …Norma confessed her sexual orientation was either bi- or lesbian. She got pregnant with a second child sometime in 1965. The child was adopted by the baby's father under the condition that McCorvey never attempt contact. The Roe baby at the center of the abortion case was conceived in 1969. McCorvey, who was homeless and living on the street during her pregnancy, wanted to get an abortion, but was prevented from doing so by Texas law. She gave birth to the Roe baby in June 1970, and gave her up for private adoption. McCorvey claims she lent her name to the case because her circumstances fit a profile the pro-choice lawyers felt was compelling. She claims they approached her about challenging the Texas anti-abortion laws; she didn't contact them. McCorvey said she really had nothing to do with the case: never testified, never appeared in court, and only learned of the Supreme Court ruling sometime after-the-fact. McCorvey's situation was used to create a pro-choice test case because she had inquired about an abortion and was prevented by law from receiving one. She has since become a staunch pro-life advocate. Slightly Different Version ROE v. WADE all started in 1969 when a young girl, Norma L. McCorvey, discovered she was pregnant then realized that she was in desperate need of an abortion. The state of Texas says that, "abortion is allowed and performed in the cases of rape and incest"; anti-abortion state. That being her only problem her friends suggested that she claim the pregnancy to be from a product of rape. However, this plan failed; there was no police report on record documenting the alleged rape. McCorvey attempted to obtain an illegal abortion, but found the unauthorized site closed down by the police. Later on she then was referred to attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington. The next year, attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington filed a law suit in a U.S. District Court in Texas on behalf of Norma L. McCorvey. During this time, McCorvey was no longer claiming her pregnancy was the result of rape and then stated she had lied earlier about being raped. The defendant in the case was Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade, representing the State of Texas vs. Norma McCorvey. The US District Court ruled in McCorvey's favor on the merits, but declined to grant an injunction against the enforcement of the laws barring abortion. The District Court based their decision off a previous case, Griswold v. Connecticut, regarding a right to use contraceptives. The case was subsequently appealed and eventually reached the US Supreme Court.
It was ostensibly against Henry Wade, District Attorney of Rockwell County, Texas, who was legally obliged to support the local laws that prohibited abortion. Jane Doe was fou…nd by supporters of abortion. She (real name Norma McCorvey, who is now pro-life) got pregnant in 1969 and was given some bad advice - she told people she was raped, hoping to obtain a legal abortion. Attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington ended up taking her case and they brought it all the way to the Supreme Court where it was heard in October 1972. In January of 1973, abortion became legal in the United States. Were you looking for more people than that? To fully understand what happened with Roe v Wade, you also need to look at Doe v Bolton (same year) and Giswold v Connecticut (1965). There are other important ones, but those are the big supporting pieces of law.
The plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, (1973) was identified as "Jane Roe," a common proxy for the name of someone who wishes to remain anonymous. The real plaintiff in the case was No…rma McCorvey. McCorvey never had an abortion. She gave birth to a baby girl who was immediately placed for adoption. McCorvey renounced her pro-choice stance in recent years and has become a Right to Life activist.
Roe v. Wade, (1973) was a civil case so there was no defendant. The nominal respondent, Henry B. Wade, was the District Attorney of Dallas County, Texas. Wade was named becaus…e of the office he occupied; the real "defendant" would have been the State of Texas, but states have immunity from being sued (per the Eleventh Amendment). The consequence of the decision was that the Texas anti-abortion law was overturned. There were no known personal consequences for Henry Wade or anyone else on the respondent side of the case. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
Attorney Henry Wade of Texas
The court assured the right to a legal abortion.
The Tenth Amendment concerns powers reserved to the states. Some believe the federal government abrogated the states' rights by overturning anti-abortion laws, on the theory t…hat medical practice is regulated by the states and the Constitution doesn't expressly give the federal government authority over that area. Others might point out that individual civil rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment (not to mention the Ninth Amendment and others in the Bill of Rights from which the right to privacy is inferred) trumps the Tenth Amendment claim. These two arguments will never be reconciled in most people's minds.
The decision in Roe v. Wade, (1973) rests on the judicial concept of "Substantive Due Process," which holds that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause is intended to pro…tect all unenumerated rights considered fundamental and "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," among these the right to privacy. Use of Substantive Due Process is considered judicial activism, in that it seeks to limit the scope of laws that undermine personal liberty, even if the law doesn't address a right specifically mentioned in the Constitution. Earlier, Lochner-era (approximately 1897-1937, second industrial revolution) Courts used Substantive Due Process in a way that reduced protection of the individual against exploitation by businesses and the government, such as protecting the right of the individual to negotiate contracts with an employer by holding employment laws regulating minimum wage and work conditions unconstitutional. Today, Substantive Due Process is used to protect the individual against exploitation or legislation that creates an undue burden on individuals, or on an identifiable group or class of citizens. In order to determine whether the government has valid cause to interfere in people's lives, the Court applies a "rational basis test" to determine whether the legislation is related to a legitimate government interest. If the law passes the rational basis test, the Court next applies "strict scrutiny" to determine whether there is a compelling state interest that justifies violating the groups' or individuals' fundamental rights, and whether the law is applied as narrowly as possible to infringe those rights as little possible. The right to privacy is intrinsic in this abortion case because the Court held that the decision about whether to terminate or continue a pregnancy was one that should be made between doctor and patient, not legislated by the government. While the Court has consistently acknowledged the State's interest in the life of the unborn child, that right has been held subordinate to the right to privacy. Case Citation: Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
The supreme court decision in the case Roe v. Wade was 7 votes for Roe, and 2 votes against Roe. ....... legal provision: Due process. the judges in the case were ( by last na…me ): Burger ( wrote a regular conurence..... voted for women to have a right to abbortion.) Douglas ( wrote a regular concurence) Brennan ( voted with the majority) Stewart ( wrote a regular concurence) White ( wrote a dissent ... voted that we should not have the right to abbortion.) Marshall ( voted with the majority) Blackmun ( wrote the majority opinion) Powell ( voted with the majority) Rehnquist ( wrote a dissent.)
why was Roe v. Wade a landmark case
it discusses how roe wanted to abort and wade was against it but it would violate the 4th amendment and basically it discussed the issues of abortion