in the Roe v. Wade case. Many of the laws were found to be unconstitutional, but the court found ways to limit certain women -- those of low income or young women. The limitation for young women was held on the basis that they were to notify and receive the consent of their parents to go through with a safe and legal abortion. This again violated a woman’s right to privacy but was argued on the basis of her mental capacity and maturity for her young age. These cases included Hodgson v. Minnesota and Harris v. McRae as examples (Planned). By 1992, there was a lingering fear that the Roe v. Wade case may be overturned due to the structure of the Supreme Court. This notion came about after the ruling of a Pennsylvania abortion limitation. In the …show more content…
Wade, there have been many organizations hold certain stances in regard to the ethics of abortion. There has been a divide among supporters of the decision of the case and those who oppose it. Those in favor of the ruling identify themselves as pro-choice believing that women have the ultimate right and say over what they would like to do with their body. On the other hand, there are supporters of the pro-life movement. Those supporters believe the controversial matter of the viability of life in the womb.
Those against the ruling of Roe contend that there is no justifiable reason in backing up the argument using the constitutional. Similar to the dissenting Justices, they argue that Constitution is not a valid reference point, and urges that the issue is left up to each state’s legislative process instead of a ruling from the Supreme Court. This suggestion makes for a flawed claim. The position of a Supreme Court Justice holds the highest power over the law. It is their job to interpret the Constitution to however it is deemed fit of the case. Being as this all started as a Texas law that restricted abortion, it is right that the Justices back up their stance with the Constitution and to interpret it in the context of the