Portal field news

Portal field news

in

🌏 | Resending US Supreme Court overturns 73 decision not to recognize abortion rights


写真 

Resending U.S. Supreme Court overturns 73 decision not to recognize abortion rights

 
If you write the contents roughly
The Roe v. Wade decision allows abortion between 24-28 weeks gestation, when the fetus can be raised outside the womb.
 

(Some of the expressions in the text will be clarified and retransmitted.) [Washington, XNUMXth, Reuters] – The US Supreme Court is XNUMX… → Continue reading

 Reuters


Wikipedia related words

If there is no explanation, there is no corresponding item on Wikipedia.

Law vs. Wade

Law vs. Wade(Low Tai Wade Jiken,Roe v. Wade. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973))妊娠Women's decision on whether to continuePoliciesIncluded in the right "as the United States ConstitutionAmended Article 14 Female OfAbortionFor the first time, it was judged that it guarantees the rights ofAbortionUS domestic law to regulateUnconstitutional invalidAnd1973 OfUnited States Supreme CourtIt is a judgment of.

Abortion,United States ConstitutionAs a right guaranteed by the government, the decision that prohibits abortion is unconstitutional (Raw decision) isThe United States of AmericaIt had a great influence on the law and politics and society of.Whether abortion should be legalized, the role of the Supreme Court in constitutional courts, religion in politics, and so on, the ruling has sparked a great deal of controversy in many areas.

The low decision isUnited States historyAbove, it is one of the most politically controversial cases.

History

Case law up to the low decision

In the United States, since its founding19st centuryUntil he entered, he was not punished for abortion before the feeling of fetal movement.the 1820sSince then, states have emerged that regulate abortion, mainly because of consideration for women's health, and this movement accelerated in the latter half of the 19th century.the 1950sBy then, abortion was banned in most states, with the exception of the danger to women's lives.on the other hand,the 1960sWhen you enter, you can see the movement to relax the conditions of abortion,1970By then, abortion had been legalized in four states[1].

On the other hand, since the 1960s, in case lawRight of privacyHas been recognized as a constitutional right in the United States.1965Grizzwold vs. Connecticut Case Decision[2]And the Supreme Court婚姻By a couple in a relationshipContraceptiveForbidden to useConnecticutHe ruled the law unconstitutional as an infringement of his right to privacy.The majority opinion of Griswold ruled that the right to privacy is recognized as a "penumbra" of various human rights provisions of the United States Constitution, although there is no explicit provision in the Constitution.1972Eisenstat vs. Baird Judgment[3]The Massachusetts Act, which limits the purchase of contraceptives to married people, was unconstitutional, saying that possession of contraceptives by unmarried couples is also recognized as part of their right to privacy.However, there were no precedents that ruled women's right to abortion prior to Law.

Background of the incident

Roe v. Wade is a pregnant unmarried womanNorma McCorveyAnd was arrested for an abortion operationDoctorAs plaintiffs, Texas law prohibiting abortion surgery is unconstitutional unless it is necessary to protect the life of the mother.19703TexasDallas CountyThe case was filed against the district attorney Henry Wade (the plaintiff's name, "Jane Law," was used to conceal the plaintiff's identity.KanaIs).Plaintiffs alleged that the provisions of state law were unclear and violated the constitutionally guaranteed right of women to have an abortion.

The Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted Law et al.'S complaint, but dismissed the request for an injunction against enforcement of the law.[4]..Both plaintiffs and defendants have appealed, and the US Supreme Court has granted the appeal. The first oral argument was held in December 1971, but Chief Judge Berger sought a retrial, and a second oral argument was held in October 12.In the oral argument, lawyer Sarah Weddington made an argument on behalf of Law and others.

Judgment

Supreme Court of the United States The1973On January 1, it ruled 22-7 that the abortion law in Texas (which banned abortion in principle) was unconstitutional.Blackman wrote the majority opinion, with Judges Burger, Douglas, Brennan, Stuart, Marshall, and Powell agreeing.Judges White and Rehnquist (later Chief Judges) expressed their dissenting opinions.

Majority opinion

The majority first looked back at the history of abortion regulation and pointed out that the law that punishes abortion as a crime, which was common in the United States at the time, is a relatively new legislation since the latter half of the 19th century.Next, we consider the right to privacy, and while admitting that the Constitution does not explicitly mention the right to privacy, the stateDue Process of LawWithout, the right to privacy was recognized as a constitutional right on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibited the deprivation of people's freedom.The Supreme Court emphasizes the physical and psychological burden that women incur during pregnancy and after childbirth, and women have the right to privacy.AbortionIt was held that it includes the right to decide whether or not to do so.However, the constitutionality of the law limiting this is that the right to abortion is not absolute and should be balanced with the interests of the state, and that the right to abortion is a fundamental right.Strict examination criteriaSaid that it will be judged by.

The majority commented that the life of the fetus was not specified by the US Constitution as "human" including the fetus.When does human life begin?Avoided being involved in the dispute.On top of that, the state has unavoidable benefits of protecting maternal health, and after the time when the fetus can survive outside the mother, the state is obliged to protect its potential for life. It was said to have no profit.

Based on the above analysis, the Supreme Court divided pregnancies into quarters and set constitutional restrictions on abortion regulations by the state for each.In the first quarter, the government may not ban abortion and may only set medical requirements (such as having to rely on a licensed obstetrician).In the second half of the year, the government cannot ban abortion, but it can limit the methods of abortion to the extent reasonably necessary for maternal health.After the third half of the year, that is, after the fetus has the potential to survive independently, the government may ban abortion unless it is necessary to protect the life and health of the mother.The framework for dividing this pregnancy into three quarters is1992Overturned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey's decision.

As a result, the provisions of Texas law, which totally banned abortion except when necessary to protect the life of the mother, were unconstitutionally invalid.The Doe-Bolton case, which was issued on the same day, made Georgia law unconstitutional, which prohibited abortion except in the case of maternal health and life-threatening, serious fetal disability, and rape pregnancy.In addition, abortion bans in many states that do not follow the above framework have been automatically revoked.

Still moreTexasPlaintiff Law is at the Supreme CourtOral argumentHe argued that he had already given birth at that time and could not be relieved by the ruling, the case was mood (hypothetical) and the claim should be dismissed.The majority commented that it would be difficult to file a proceeding during pregnancy and seek the judgment of a senior court, and that applying Moot's principle would make judicial review virtually impossible. The exception of "is spared the proceedings" was applied and the Texas claim was dismissed.

opposite opinion

With Judge WhiteJudge RenquistWrote their dissenting opinions and criticized the majority, recognizing women's right to abortion.Opposition argues first that the Supreme Court should not recognize unspecified rights of privacy, especially the right to abortion of women.Judge Renquist's dissenting opinion pointed out that these laws were not constitutionally problematic at the time of adoption, even though 14 anti-abortion laws had been enacted by 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. He criticized the majority opinion for creating new rights against the will of the clear and drafters.Further dissenting points out that courts should not step into the adjustment of two conflicting values: fetal growth and its impact on women.Judge White argued that the pros and cons of abortion should be left to the democratic decision-making process of the people.

Disputation over Law's decision

This ruling made it impossible for pro-life groups to ban abortion through the law, so there are various grassroots movements, from sitting in a clinic performing abortion surgery and persuading women who are thinking of having an abortion to promoting adoption. Has been unfolded.In addition, some groups in the anti-abortion movement used violent means such as harassment of doctors performing abortion operations and, in extreme cases, murder.These hardliners justified the killings by saying that killing doctors would save the lives of many fetuses, but the mainstream prolifeists strongly oppose the use of violence.With abortionBreast cancerA law was enacted in Texas requiring women who are actually considering abortion to distribute a document informing them of the risk of breast cancer, but the National Cancer Institute has established an abortion and breast cancer. Denies the relationship.[5]In addition, with abortionMental illnessAnd infertility have been pointed out.[6] January 1nd, when the low decision was made, is every yearWashington DCProtests are taking place in front of the US Supreme Court building in.

On the other hand, many people support the low decision.Women's associations, in particular, strongly oppose the change in case law, saying that this decision, which endorses women's right to self-determination, is an important case in achieving women's equality.Pro choiceFactions are forced to give birth to undesired pregnanciesGender equalityTo prevent abortion, in secondary educationSex education,contraceptionHe claims that the use of ingredients and the involvement of parents in their children are effective means.It is pointed out that if abortion bans are allowed, rich women can have abortion operations in other states where abortion is legal, while poor women perform dangerous abortion operations, resulting in harm to women's health. There is also.

Opinions are divided among lawyers.The biggest criticism of Law's decision is that the US Supreme Court has approved new rights that have no basis in the constitutional statement or the will of the enactor.[7]..On the other hand, supporters of the Law decision said that the Supreme Court has always beenmarriageRight, the right to raise children,contraceptionHe has recognized various rights that are not explicitly stated in the Constitution, such as the right of abortion, and claims that the Law decision recognizing the right to abortion is not contrary to the case law.[8]..There is also a dispute over how the value of fetal life should be positioned in the Constitution and in which clause the right to abortion should be based.

Pros and cons of the Law decision are still in fierce debate.Judge Breyer of the United States Supreme Court summarized the conflict between the two in the 2000 Stenberg v Carhartt case as follows:[9].

Millions of Americans are hesitant about the idea that life begins at fertilization, abortion is the murder of an innocent child and a violation of child freedom, and that the law allows abortion. ..For millions of others, the ban on abortion forces many American women into dignified lives, deprives them of their freedom, and drives the poorest women into illegal abortions at risk of death and suffering. I believe it will be the case.

Post-judgment movement

Precedent

Supporting Abortion BanRonald ReaganPresidentWas controversial when he appointed a federal judge, using his attitude toward abortion as a criterion.As the Supreme Court justice for the Law decision retired and President Reagan appointed a conservative judge to replace him.the 1980sIt was expected that Law's decision would be overturned in the second half.Judges always see fierce disagreements over the right to abortion, but even as of 2021, the central part of Law's decision to recognize the right to abortion for women has not been overturned.The important Supreme Court cases after the judgment of Law are as follows.

Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services Incident

The US Supreme Court in 1989 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services Case[10]In 5 to 4, a constitutional decision was made on restrictions on certain abortions, and the framework based on the third half of the Law decision was changed. Multiple opinions by the three judges violently attacked Law, but did not step into explicit case law changes.Conservative Judge Scalia agreed only with the conclusions of the decision, and several criticized that Law should have changed.Judge Blackman, author and ardent supporter of Law, disagreed and pointed out headwinds to the right to abortion.

Planned Parenthood vs. Casey

Judges who support the low decision retired and replacedGeorge HW BushIt was expected that Law would be overturned as two judges appointed by the president joined the Supreme Court.However, in 2, the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey case[11]So the Supreme Court kept Law's decision 5-4.The three Judges O'Connor, Kennedy, and Suter, appointed by President Reagan, have jointly expressed multiple views reaffirming that the Constitution guarantees women's right to abortion.Multiple opinions, on the other hand, criticized Law's three-quarter analysis, and instead argued that restrictions on abortion were an "excessive burden" on women.Unconstitutional examination standardsWas introduced.Chief Judge Rehnquist and Judge Scalia wrote bitter dissenting opinions.

Stenberg vs. Carhartt

Supreme Court in 2000, Stenberg vs. Carhartt[12]So, for the first time in the majority opinion, the "excessive burden" standard used by the three judges at Casey was adopted, and partial abortion (partial abortion).en: Partial-birth abortion) Was prohibitedNebraskaThe law was unconstitutional.Judge Kennedy, who participated in multiple opinions in the Casey case, disagreed in this case.Judges Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas each expressed opposition calling for a change in the case law of Law.

Gonzales vs. Carhartt

The Supreme Court in 2007, Gonzales vs. Carhartt[13]In, it was decided that the federal law prohibiting partial abortion was constitutional 5 to 4. In 2003President BushThe federal law, signed and passed by, was not in force because three federal district courts and appeals courts in the United States had ruled unconstitutional.The majority opinion by Judge Kennedy should avoid judgments on the validity of Law and Casey, and respect Congress's judgment that partial abortion is always dangerous, and the law is excessive for women. It is not a burden, and the judicial precedents so far do not violate the Constitution.This judgment is the first Supreme Court case regarding the ban on abortion after Judge O'Connor, who was active in advocating the right to abortion, retired and Judge Arito, a conservative, took office.President Bush said, "Human dignityIt supports the progress we have made to protect the mysteries of life. "Hillary Clinton"The decision is a deviation from more than 40 years of respect for women's right to self-determination and health, and (the constitutional decision) undermines women's rights under the Constitution."[14].

legislation

At the federal level,the 1990sA bill banning partial abortion in the middleCongressPassed, butBill ClintonThe presidentVetoWas activated and was not established.After the Stenberg case, Congress passed a bill again in 2003 banning partial abortion.George W. BushIt was established after the signature of the president.A lawsuit was filed over the constitutionality of the law, and the Supreme Court ruled in 2007.[15].

With President Bush's appointment of two new US Supreme Court justices, legislation is also underway at the state level aimed at changing the case of Law.South DakotaThen in February 2006, rape andIncestA law was passed that made all abortions, including pregnancy, a felony, and was signed by the governor.The law provides an exception only to prevent the danger of a woman's life, which is clearly inconsistent with Law.The proponent says he hopes the law will be an opportunity for the Supreme Court to change the law decision. In November 2006, a referendum on the law was held and was abolished by the majority of opposition.[16].

In addition, MississippiBut a similar bill was proposed, but the Senate and the House of Representatives did not reach an agreement and it was abandoned.[17].

After Jane Law

Jane Law, the plaintiff in the Law caseNorma McCorveyIt is,1995In 8 monthキ リ ス ト 教 OfbaptismIn responseク リ ス チ ャ ンbecome,Professional lifeHe turned to work as an anti-abortionist.

In 2005, McCorby was in the Roe v. Wade case.Supreme CourtCall for a review of the judgmentappealFiled a motion and was sentenced to Law as a plaintiffretrialI filed.At a press conference held on January 1, the same year, McCorby said, "I was used by ambitious lawyer Sarah Weddington, who was looking for a plaintiff candidate to challenge Texas law banning abortion. ""PieceIt was. "The Federal Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has invalidated the Texas law in question on September 5, 2004, and the case isMoot (invalid)Dismissed the complaint as[18]. 20172/18Died at the age of 69[19].

Impact on society

Support the rulingPro choiceThe faction (the position that recognizes the right of women to have an abortion) is that of women.Reproductive RightsWe strongly oppose the change of the case law of Law, considering that it is an important judgment in establishing the case.On the other hand, requesting a change in case lawProfessional life(FetusThe Supreme Court has severely criticized the ruling's failure to recognize the vitality of the fetus and the Supreme Court's right to abortion, which is not explicitly stated in the Constitution.

Violent crimes (especially) that have been increasing since the 1990sJuvenile crime) Has decreased dramatically because the legalization of abortion did not give birth to "unwanted children."University of ChicagoClaimed by economists in the world and caused controversy.However, Stephen has no political or religious intent, and is an allegation based on an economic point of view.

Conflicts within the United States over abortion are fierce, and the roots of the central issue are the pros and cons of changing Law. In 2005, the composition of the Supreme Court of the United States changed, and the movement to change the case has become active again.

footnote

  1. ^ Roe v. Wade. Wade, 410 US 133,138-140 (1973).
  2. ^ Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965).
  3. ^ Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 US 438 (1972).
  4. ^ Roe v. Wade, 314 F.Supp. 1217, (ND Tex. 1970).
  5. ^ National Cancer Center, Abortion, Miscarriage, and Breast Cancer Risk.
  6. ^ Abortion: Risk, US National Library of Health.
  7. ^ See, eg John Hart Ely, The Wages of Crying Wolf; A Comment on Roe v. Wade, 82 Yale Law Journal, 920 (1973).
  8. ^ See, eg Laurence Tribe, Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes 99 (1990).
  9. ^ Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 US 914, 920 (2000).
  10. ^ Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 US 490 (1989).
  11. ^ Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 US 833 (1992).
  12. ^ Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 US 914 (2000).
  13. ^ Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 US ___ (2007).
  14. ^ "Partial Ban on Abortion Law" Constitutional "US Supreme Court Decision Strong Opposition" "Asahi Shimbun" April 2007, 4 Evening Edition
  15. ^ "Bill Mears,"Justices uphold ban on abortion procedure", CNN.com, April 18, 2007.
  16. ^ "US Referendum: Missouri, ES Cell Research'Acceptance'/ South Dakota, Abortion Prohibition Law'Rejection'" Mainichi Shimbun November 2006, 11
  17. ^ MacIntyre, Krystal. "Mississippi abortion ban bill fails as legislators miss deadline for compromise Archived August 2012, 8, at the Wayback Machine. ", Jurist News Archive, March 28, 2006.
  18. ^ McCorvey v. Hill, 385 F.3d 846 (2004). Court of Appeals decision (FindLaw, PDF file)
  19. ^ INC, SANKEI DIGITAL (January 2017, 2). “"J. Lo" dies U.S. woman who paved the way for abortion”(Japanese). Sankei News.Sangyo Keizai Shimbun. 2020/3/15Browse.

References

Related item

外部 リンク

Written opinion

Play the audio of the English version of the article (19 Minute)
Spoken Wikipedia icon
This audio fileIs an English version of the article on February 2005, 7 (2005-07-16)It was created based on the edition, and the edited contents of the subsequent articles are not reflected.

Oral argument

Other court documents

Other media

    Pregnancy 24


     

    Back to Top
    Fermer