The Supreme Court decided the case on January 22,1973.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, overturning all state laws outlawing or restricting abortion. It is one of the most controversial decisions in U.S. Supreme Court history.

Argued December 13, 1971

Reargued October 11, 1972

Decided January 22, 1973

The sitting Court for Roe v. Wade, (1973):

Chief Justice

Warren Burger................1969 - 1986..........Nixon (R)

Associate Justices

William O. Douglas..........1939 - 1975..........Roosevelt (D)

William J. Brennan, Jr......1956 - 1990..........Eisenhower (R)

Potter Stewart................1958 - 1981..........Eisenhower (R)

Byron White...................1962 - 1993..........Kennedy (D)

Thurgood Marshall...........1967 - 1991..........Johnson (D)

Harry Blackmun..............1970 - 1994..........Nixon (R)

Lewis F. Powell, Jr............1972 - 1987..........Nixon (R)

William H. Rehnquist........1972 - 2005..........Nixon (R)

Roe v. Wade, (1973), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, overturning all state laws outlawing or restricting abortion. It is one of the most controversial decisions in U.S. Supreme Court history.

The decision in Roe v. Wade prompted a decades-long national debate over whether terminating pregnancies should be legal (or more precisely, whether a state can deem the act illegal if it chooses to do so); the role of the Supreme Court in constitutional adjudication; and the role of religious views in the political sphere. Roe v. Wade became one of the most politically significant Supreme Court decisions in history, reshaping national politics, dividing the nation into "pro-choice" and "pro-life" camps, and inspiring grassroots activism.

Opposition to Roe comes primarily from those who viewed the Court's decision as illegitimate for straying too far from the text and history of the Constitution, and those possessing beliefs about the personhood of fetal human life.

Support for Roe comes from those who view the decision as necessary to preserve women's equality and personal freedom, and those who believe in the privacy of individual over collective rights, although the opposition to Roe often reference the privacy of the individual when referring to the unborn child. Also law enforcement and health care professionals supported legalizing abortions because before Roe v. Wade, illegal abortions were the number one cause of preventable deaths for women of childbearing age. Workers were tired of scraping dead teenagers off back alleys who tried to get abortions from irreputable sources, and health care workers saw countless women die trying to get what could be a safe and legal procedure.

Answer

Roe (the legal pseudonym used by a pregnant single woman) was a single woman who wanted to get an abortion in the state of Texas in 1971, but couldn't because the procedure was illegal.

Roe v. Wade centrally held that a mother may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes 'viable.'" The Court defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."

The age of viability is currently 24 weeks, approximately six months.

Answer

Any discussion of Roe v. Wade requires mentioning Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's plurality/majority opinion from Casey v. Planned Parenthood, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S.Ct. 2791 U.S.Pa., 1992. This may come as a surprise to most, but Roe v. Wade does not reflect the current state of the law regarding abortion. What someone else may tell you notwithstanding, Roe is little more than an easily remembered symbol. Of the many abortion cases the US Supreme Court has decided since Roe, some have significantly altered the legal relevance of Roe. Of those cases, Casey had the greatest affect. Casey actually modified Roe in the following ways:

The idea that the right elucidated in Roe emanated from the Constitution was affirmed, but not enthusiastically. Instead, Justice O'Connor stated that the judicial doctrine of stare decisis required reaffirmation of Roe's essential holding; that a woman's right to choose an abortion before the fetus becomes viable overrides the state's opposing interest in protecting a potential life. While this may sound obvious, as it is an accurate and concise restatement of Roe, it led to increased tension among those who follow Roe. For the first time the high court explicitly voiced the idea that Roeturned on the balancing of competing interests. In so doing, the court explicitly recognized that the state had a reasonable and legitimate interest in protecting a potential life.

The bright line trimester approach of Roe was rejected due to the fact that the state of medical science is not static. [Casey reduced the legal age of viability from 24 to 22 weeks.] In its place, Justice O'Connor specified that if the state regulation did not impose an "undue burden" on a woman's right to choose an abortion, the law would not be struck down. In other words, before a state law regulating an abortion procedure would be struck down as unconstitutional, it would have to impose a substantial obstacle to the woman's effective right to elect the procedure.

Since Casey, the US Supreme Court weakened Roeeven further when it refused to find the 2003 ban on so called "partial-birth abortion" unconstitutional. Gonzales v Carhart, 550 U.S. 124, 127 S.Ct 1610 U.S., 2007. Before Gonzales, it was generally accepted that any regulation that prohibits an abortion procedure after the fetus has become viable will be deemed unconstitutional unless it contains an exception to protect the life or the health of the mother. By refusing to find the 2003 ban on "partial-birth abortion" unconstitutional, the majority in Gonzales rejected the necessity of requiring any post viability prohibition of an abortion procedure contain an exception for the life or the health of the mother.

Case Citation:

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

For more information, see Related Questions, below. am i wrong or nah
Roe v. Wade was a court case defending a woman's rights to abortion.

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.

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 Norma 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.

Case Citation:

Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)

There are three ways Roe v. Wade, (1973) can be overturned:

1. Since Roe vs. Wade was a Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court can effectively overturn the decision by ruling against abortion in a future case.
2. Congress can pass legislation protecting the fetus from the moment of conception (There are usually several bills addressing this issue in committee during each Congressional term. The 111th Congress (current) includes three House Resolutions and one Senate bill.).
3. Congress and the states can amend the Constitution to include the definition of "person" to include the unborn (this is the least likely scenario).

The Burger Court vote in Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973) was split 7-2, as contrasted with the later 5-4 Rehnquist Court vote in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 US 833 (1992), a later case that upheld Roe and removed many obstacles in state laws restricting women's access to abortion without overtly prohibiting it. The the voting shift in the latter case was caused by the addition of more conservative justices to the Court, following a long string of Republican Presidencies.

Majority (Roe)

Chief Justice Warren Burger

Justice William O. Douglas

Justice William J. Brennan

Justice Potter Stewart

Justice Thurgood Marshall

Justice Harry Blackmun*

Justice Lewis Powell

Dissenting (Wade)

Justice Byron White

Justice William Rehnquist

* Justice Blackmun wrote the majority opinion.

The most important modification Webster made to the decision in Roe was elimination of the bright-line Trimester Rule originally used to determine what procedures could be performed at each stage of pregnancy.

In 1973, the age of viability was generally considered 24-28 weeks, with the Court opting to support the lower end of the threshold. In the last 38 years, medical advances have allowed doctors to (occasionally) save fetuses at close to 20 weeks (late second trimester). In light of these changes, Missouri law requires physicians to perform fetal viability tests at 20 or more weeks gestation. If the fetus can potentially live outside the womb, the abortion is prohibited. This seems reasonable in light of current technology.

Webster also covered certain issues not addressed in Roe, such as whether public funding had to be used to perform medically unnecessary abortions, and whether public employees were allowed to counsel pregnant women about abortion. This may restrict access and create a bit of a burden for lower income women.

Summary of Webster

In Webster v Reproductive Health Services, (1989), the Supreme Court decided by a vote of 5-4 that a Missouri state law restricting access to abortion was not unconstitutional. The specific statutory provisions upheld by the Court included the state's refusal to "use public employees and public facilities... in performing or assisting abortions unnecessary to save the mother's life"; the prohibition against encouraging and counseling women to have abortions; and a mandate that physicians perform fetal viability tests on women in their "twentieth (or more) week of pregnancy."

Case Citation:

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989)