Equal Protections In The 1800s

Fighting for equal protection has been tricky as finding the balance between sweet and salty. The meaning and situations it is brought up in are ever changing. Equal protection was something that was going to come up eventually whether people wanted it or not. The constitution was made by a bunch of old white men, many of whom owned slaves. No person of color or woman was on the committee to bring their two cents in. Back in 1787 equal protection wasn’t even thought of, hence why it was added 80 years later in 1868.

To begin, before the 14th Amendment was passed there had always been the need for equal protection without the government interfering too heavily in getting those protections. In 1868, in response to the Civil Rights act of 1866.

Wade of 1973. This case challenges what exact equal protections people had, particularly to people capable of having a child. Roe challenges the state of Texas’ laws on abortion. She and many others felt they it was unconstitutional to keep such strict laws on abortion. The law stated that abortions should not be done unless to save a woman's life. Roe argued that having an abortion was a personal matter that should be up to the person having it, and not restricted by the Texas government for no good reason. Roe v Wade ruled that the ban on abortion unless to save someone’s life was unconstitutional. “The Court ruled that the states were forbidden from outlawing or regulating any aspect of abortion performed during the first trimester of pregnancy, could only enact abortion regulations reasonably related to maternal health in the second and third trimesters, and could enact abortion laws protecting the life of the fetus only in the third trimester”

New contemporary court cases relating Roe v Wade are Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey and Akron v. Akron Center For Reproductive Health. In these cases, the 14th Amendment’s right to privacy and equal protection was pushed even further. Pennsylvania’s abortion control law was amended in 1988 and 1989. Pennsylvania legislature wanted “informed consent and a 24 hour waiting period prior to the procedure” (4). “A married woman seeking an abortion had to indicate that she notified her husband of her intention to abort the fetus” (5). The Court wanted to know whether all of the requirements in the abortion control law were constitutional. Akron city council made an ordinance that would regulate abortion performances. The ordinance wanted “all abortions performed after the first trimester to be done in hospitals, parental consent before the procedure could be performed on an unmarried minor, doctors to counsel prospective patients, a twenty-four hour waiting period, and that fetal remains be disposed of in a humane and sanitary manner” (6). The Court wanted to know whether the ordinance violates Roe v Wade or infringes on the 14th