Changes

This decision is therefore one of the most famous examples of law by judicial fiat, that is judges writing the laws. It created a dangerous precedent that is still followed today of the 'living constitution."

This decision is therefore one of the most famous examples of law by judicial fiat, that is judges writing the laws. It created a dangerous precedent that is still followed today of the 'living constitution."

==Opinion==

==Opinion==

The opinion, written by Justice [[Harry Blackmun]], declares that [[abortion]] is a "fundamental right" under the [[U.S. Constitution]] and [[substantive due process]] under the [[Fourteenth Amendment]].  Writing for the 7-2 Court, Justice Blackmun held that [[abortion]] is a fundamental right because it falls under the "[[penumbra]]" of the [[right to privacy]].  ''Roe'' provided the underpinning for cases such as [[Griswold v. Connecticut]]<ref>See generally Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479</ref> and [[Lawrence v. Texas]].<ref>See, e.g., Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558</ref>, all of which set up spheres of personal activity which states cannot regulate without "good cause."

The opinion, written by Justice [[Harry Blackmun]], declares that [[abortion]] is a "fundamental right" under the [[U.S. Constitution]] and [[substantive due process]] under the [[Fourteenth Amendment]].  Writing for the 7-2 Court, Justice Blackmun held that [[abortion]] is a fundamental right because it falls under the "[[penumbra]]" of the [[right to privacy]].  ''Roe'' provided the underpinning for cases such as [[Griswold v. Connecticut]]<ref>See generally Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479</ref> and [[Lawrence v. Texas]],<ref>See, e.g., Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558</ref> all of which set up spheres of personal activity which states cannot regulate without "good cause."

Specifically, Blackmun found that the right to terminate a pregnancy is in the penumbra of [[privacy]] rights protected by [[substantive due process]], since pregnancy can occasion life-changing events for women, changes not to be taken lightly.  However, he noted that the woman's interest in her own privacy is counterbalanced, obviously, by the fetus' interest in life, and the state's interest in protecting life.  The question, then, is when each interest trumps the other, and what that means at law.  Blackmun set up this framework specifically:

Specifically, Blackmun found that the right to terminate a pregnancy is in the penumbra of [[privacy]] rights protected by [[substantive due process]], since pregnancy can occasion life-changing events for women, changes not to be taken lightly.  However, he noted that the woman's interest in her own privacy is counterbalanced, obviously, by the fetus' interest in life, and the state's interest in protecting life.  The question, then, is when each interest trumps the other, and what that means at law.  Blackmun set up this framework specifically: