Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
4 bytes added ,  04:09, November 21, 2007
→‎Opinion: We need a definition of "privacy"
Line 6: Line 6:  
The opinion, written by Justice [[Harry Blackmun]], centers around the holding that abortion is a "fundamental right" under the [[U.S. Constitution]] and [[substantive due process]] under the [[Fourteenth Amendment]].  Essentially, he argued, 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]], centers around the holding that abortion is a "fundamental right" under the [[U.S. Constitution]] and [[substantive due process]] under the [[Fourteenth Amendment]].  Essentially, he argued, 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:
 
::”(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.
 
::”(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.
  
Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650

edits

Navigation menu