Privacy at Issue: the US Supreme Court's Abortion Cases Jesseca Holcomb PSC 499 November 28, 2007

1. Privacy at Issue: the US Supreme Court's Abortion Cases Jesseca Holcomb PSC 499 November 28, 2007

2. The History of American Government • The Declaration of Independence • The U.S. Constitution • English “common law” • The State Supreme Court vs. Federal Supreme Court

3. Natural Law vs. Natural Rights • The concept of natural law was to clearly define the powers of the new independent nation that was equal to England. • The concept of natural rights was used to clearly define the line between powers of the government and the rights of citizens • Both concepts are simultaneously expressed within the text of the Declaration of Independence.

4. Philosophers’ theories • John Locke • Montesquieu • Rousseau • John Stuart Mill • Jeremy Bentham

5. Are some rights implied within the Bill of Rights? Are some rights implied within the Bill of Rights?

6. Right of Privacy • Why is it important to Americans? • It is not specifically mentioned within the Constitution • Is it an “implied” right

7. Views of Privacy Based on the Constitution • The Bill of Rights can be view as exclusive. • The Constitution can be thought of as a “living” document which is always changing with the passing of time. • A combination of both where there is a recognition of privacy as a right and the dedication to allowing state regulations to continue.

8. Personal Right of Privacy cases that were brought before the U.S. Supreme Court

9. Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) • History • Griswold and Buxton violated two Connecticut laws • The opinion of the Court reversed the State court’s decision was reversed on the basis of marital right of privacy • Guaranteed within the Ninth and the Fourteenth Amendments and the prenumbras of the Bill of Rights

10. Roe v. Wade (1973) • History • Anonymous pregnant, single woman was prevented from obtaining an abortion under Texas law. • The Court recognizes that a right of personal privacy does exist within the “zones of privacy” under the Constitution • Founded in the Fourteenth and the Ninth Amendment.

11. Maher v. Roe (1977) • History • A Connecticut regulation restricted federal funding for abortions passed the “first trimester.” • Majority opinion determined that the Connecticut regulation was not unconstitutional • The ability to have an abortion is still possible, but only through means of private funding.

12. Akron v. Akron Center of Reproductive Health (1983) • History • The City of Akron attempted to regulate abortion clinics. • The majority opinion felt that regulations of this sort were unnecessary and served no legitimate purpose in supporting the city’s interests. • The concept of “unduly burdensome” developed by Justice O’Connor

13. Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) • History • A Pennsylvania statute required the doctor to provide information concerning risks and alternatives to abortions while providing reports to the state and have another physician present during the abortion • The majority of the Court felt that the regulations in this case interfered with a woman’s right to an abortion.

14. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) • History • The state of Missouri forbade the use of public employees and facilities for the performance of nontherapeutic abortions. • The majority opinion found that Missouri’s view of abortion was not unconstitutional.

15. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) • History • Pennsylvania law required informed consent with provisions for emergencies, parental or guardian consent, and a collection of patient information. • The majority opinion concluded that the Pennsylvania laws were not unconstitutional, except for the spousal notification. • This decision overturned the previous ruling in Akron and Thornburgh

16. Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) • History • Nebraska law banned partial birth abortions, also known as dilation and extraction (D&X) • The majority opinion determined that the statute violated the decision in Casey because the language could be reasonably interpreted to ban activities other than D&X abortion procedures

17. What is the public’s opinion?

18. Public Opinion

19. Public Opinion ATTITUDES TOWARD ROE V. WADE – BY PARTY ID

20. Conclusion • Privacy will continue to be an issue because it is an unwritten law. • The Supreme Court rulings have show to be inconsistent. • They also showed to be inconsistent when it came to the importance of determining when life begins. • Because of the inconsistencies, it is impossible to predict the future for the right of privacy or the governmental leniencies for compelling state’s interest.

21. Selected References • Johnson, John. 2005. Griswold v. Connecticut: Birth Control and the Constitutional Right of Privacy. • Judges, Donald. 1993. Hard Choices, Lost Voices; How the Abortion Conflict Has Divided America, Distorted Constitutional Rights, and Damaged the Courts. • McWhirter, Darien, and Jon Bible. 1992. Privacy as a Constitutional Right: Sex, Drugs, and the Right to Life. • Sullivan, Kathleen, and Gerald Gunther. 2004. Constitutional Law (15th Ed.). • Vile, John. 1997. A Companion to the United States Constitution and Its Amendments. (2nd Ed.).