October 11, 1972 http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.... Watch the full program: http://thefilmarchived.blogspot.com/2010/10/us-supreme-court-roe-v-wade-rearg...
In a 5-4 decision in 1989's Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for the Court, declined to explicitly overrule Roe, because "none of the challenged provisions of the Missouri Act properly before us conflict with the Constitution," In this case, the Court upheld several abortion restrictions, and modified the Roe trimester framework.
In concurring opinions, O'Connor refused to reconsider Roe, and Justice Antonin Scalia criticized the Court and O'Connor for not overruling Roe. Blackmun -- author of the Roe opinion -- stated in his dissent that White, Kennedy and Rehnquist were "callous" and "deceptive," that they deserved to be charged with "cowardice and illegitimacy," and that their plurality opinion "foments disregard for the law." White had recently opined that the majority reasoning in Roe v. Wade was "warped."
With the retirement of Roe supporters William J. Brennan in 1990 and Thurgood Marshall in 1991, and their replacement by David Souter who is pro-choice and Clarence Thomas being pro-life, Roe was viewed for the first time as being in danger. During the confirmation hearings of David Souter, NOW president Molly Yard declared that confirming Souter would mean "ending freedom for women in this country."
According to NPR, in deliberations for Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), an initial majority of five Justices that would have overturned Roe foundered when Justice Kennedy switched sides. O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter joined Blackmun and Stevens to reaffirm the central holding of Roe, saying, "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, White and Thomas signed would have overturned Roe. Only Justice Blackmun would have retained Roe entirely and struck down all aspects of the statute at issue in Casey.
Scalia's dissent acknowledged that abortion rights are of "great importance to many women", but asserted that it is not a liberty protected by the Constitution, because the Constitution does not mention it, and because longstanding traditions have permitted it to be legally proscribed. Scalia concluded: "[B]y foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences, the Court merely prolongs and intensifies the anguish."
During the 1990s, Nebraska attempted to ban a certain second-trimester abortion procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (sometimes called partial birth abortion). The Nebraska ban allowed other second-trimester abortion procedures called dilation and evacuation abortions. Ginsburg (who replaced White) stated, "this law does not save any fetus from destruction, for it targets only 'a method of performing abortion'." The Supreme Court struck down the Nebraska ban by a 5-4 vote in Stenberg v. Carhart (2000), citing a right to use the safest method of second trimester abortion.
Kennedy, who had co-authored the 5-4 Casey decision upholding Roe, was among the dissenters in Stenberg, writing that Nebraska had done nothing unconstitutional. Kennedy described the second trimester abortion procedure that Nebraska was not seeking to prohibit: "The fetus, in many cases, dies just as a human adult or child would: It bleeds to death as it is torn from limb from limb. The fetus can be alive at the beginning of the dismemberment process and can survive for a time while its limbs are being torn off." Kennedy wrote that since this dilation and evacuation procedure remained available in Nebraska, the state was free to ban the other procedure sometimes called "partial birth abortion."
The remaining three dissenters in Stenberg -- Thomas, Scalia, and Rehnquist -- disagreed again with Roe: "Although a State may permit abortion, nothing in the Constitution dictates that a State must do so."
Loading...
11:00
Roe v. Wade Reargued - Oral Arguments - Part 5 (1972)by thefilmarchive836 views
@mjt19741 Cool story bro
dak879 10 months ago
MURDER MURDER MURDER!!!
Are you thinking about murder? Call the murder doctors. They will kill your baby for you.
Give them a call to have you baby
MURDERED! MURDERED! MURDERED!
They say they care about you. Just give them your money.
Give them a call at 1-800-4MURDER!
Charges and fees apply.
mjt19741 1 year ago