Roe v. Wade Supreme Court Decision – Justice White, Dissenting

Contact Your Elected Officials

Post: MR. JUSTICE WHITE, with whom MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST joins, dissenting.*

At the heart of the controversy in these cases are those recurring pregnancies that pose no danger whatsoever to the life or health of the mother but are, nevertheless, unwanted for any one or more of a variety of reasons — convenience, family planning, economics, dislike of children, the embarrassment of illegitimacy, etc. The common claim before us is that, for any one of such reasons, or for no reason at all, and without asserting or claiming any threat to life or health, any woman is entitled to an abortion at her request if she is able to find a medical advisor willing to undertake the procedure.

The Court, for the most part, sustains this position: during the period prior to the time the fetus becomes viable, the Constitution of the United States values the convenience, whim, or caprice of the putative mother more than the life or potential life of the fetus; the Constitution, therefore, guarantees the right to an abortion as against any state law or policy seeking to protect the fetus from an abortion not prompted by more compelling reasons of the mother.

With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally dissentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.

The Court apparently values the convenience of the pregnant mother more than the continued existence and development of the life or potential life that she carries. Whether or not I might agree with that marshaling of values, I can in no event join the Court’s judgment because I find no constitutional warrant for imposing such an order of priorities on the people and legislatures of the States. In a sensitive area such as this, involving as it does issues over which reasonable men may easily and heatedly differ, I cannot accept the Court’s exercise of its clear power of choice by interposing a constitutional barrier to state efforts to protect human life and by investing mothers and doctors with the constitutionally protected right to exterminate it. This issue, for the most part, should be left with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs.

It is my view, therefore, that the Texas statute is not constitutionally infirm because it denies abortions to those who seek to serve only their convenience, rather than to protect their life or health. Nor is this plaintiff, who claims no threat to her mental or physical health, entitled to assert the possible rights of those women [410 U.S. 223] whose pregnancy assertedly implicates their health. This, together with United States v. Vuitch, 402 U.S. 62 (1971), dictates reversal of the judgment of the District Court.

Likewise, because Georgia may constitutionally forbid abortions to putative mothers who, like the plaintiff in this case, do not fall within the reach of § 26-1202(a) of its criminal code, I have no occasion, and the District Court had none, to consider the constitutionality of the procedural requirements of the Georgia statute as applied to those pregnancies posing substantial hazards to either life or health. I would reverse the judgment of the District Court in the Georgia case.

FOOTNOTES:

* [This opinion applies also to No. 718, Roe v. Wade, ante p. 113.]

For the entire text, see: Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision

The Thinking Conservative
The Thinking Conservativehttps://www.thethinkingconservative.com/
The goal of THE THINKING CONSERVATIVE is to help us educate ourselves on conservative topics of importance to our freedom and our pursuit of happiness. We do this by sharing conservative opinions on all kinds of subjects, from all types of people, and all kinds of media, in a way that will challenge our perceptions and help us to make educated choices.

Canada Forces Man to Remove Cameras From Private Property Amid Anti-Racism Push

Government expands its surveillance powers, while restricting citizens from monitoring their own property, citing concerns over “racism.”

Are the E. Jean Carroll Lawsuits a RICO Case?

Trump lost his appeal in the E. Jean Carroll cases, leaving him liable for $83.3M. He plans to take the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court.

All Apologies For the Culture War Slop

"Forgive me for ignoring the elite-driven political/economic excesses, focusing instead on divisive culture war slop."

Rising sea levels are less of a threat than we were told

New study challenges climate alarmism: sea levels aren't rising faster than the past century, despite dire warnings of floods and mass migrations.

President Trump is Being Wrongfully Obstructed on Tariffs

Podcaster Zach De Gregorio, in “Wolves And Finance,” delivers a sharp editorial unpacking the truth behind Trump’s international tariff policies.

Authors of ‘Astonishing’ Study Showing Unvaccinated Kids Are Healthier Refused to Go Public With Results

Attorney Aaron Siri told the Senate a major study found vaccinated children were significantly more likely to develop chronic diseases.

US Government Imposes Sanctions on Cyber Scam Centers in Southeast Asia

U.S. govt has imposed sanctions on 19 individuals and entities for their alleged roles in an extensive network of scam centers in Burma and Cambodia.

DOJ Announces Federal Charges Against Suspect in Fatal Stabbing of Ukrainian Woman

DOJ charged man accused of fatally stabbing Ukrainian refugee on a light-rail in Charlotte, amid a growing national outcry over her murder.

Texas A&M Ousts 2 Officials After Student and Professor Clash Over Gender Identity Lesson

Texas A&M officials were removed and DOJ probe launched after video showed prof. dismissing student over gender lesson in children's literature class.

Trump Runs out of Patience With China, Sharpens His Words

President Donald Trump’s recent remarks targeting China and its allies mark a noticeable shift in tone.

Trump Signs Order Renaming Department of Defense as Department of War

President Donald Trump on Sept. 5 signed an executive order renaming the Department of Defense as the Department of War.

Trump Signs Executive Order Targeting Countries That Unlawfully Detain Americans

President Trump signed an EO on targeting the unlawful detention of American citizens around the world and to facilitate the release of hostages.

Trump Sends Warning to Venezuela After US Military Strikes Boat Allegedly Carrying Drugs

President Trump sent a warning to Venezuela after the U.S. military struck what the administration says was a boat carrying drugs in the Caribbean.
spot_img

Related Articles

Popular Categories

MAGA Business Central