Roe VWade英文及中文.docx

Roe VWade英文及中文.docx

《Roe VWade英文及中文.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Roe VWade英文及中文.docx（7页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

RoeVWade英文及中文

罗伊诉韦德案（RoeV.Wade,410U.S.113,1973）

Roev.Wade

　　Roev.Wade-ThenandNow

　　ByJanetBenshoof

　　OnJanuary22，1973，theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtstruckdowntheStateofTexas'scriminalabortionlaws，findingthattherighttodecidewhethertohaveachildisafundamentalrightguaranteedbytheU.S.Constitution.The7-2decisioninRoev.WadewouldhaveanimmediateandprofoundeffectonthelivesofAmericanwomen.BeforeRoe，itisestimatedthat"between200，000and1.2millionillegallyinducedabortionsoccur[red]annuallyintheUnitedStates."1Asmanyas5，000to10，000womendiedperyearfollowingillegalabortionsandmanyotherssufferedseverephysicalandpsychologicalinjury.2

　　Topreventwomenfromdyingorinjuringthemselvesfromunsafe，illegalorself-inducedabortions，women'sadvocatesspearheadedcampaignstoreversecentury-oldcriminalabortionlawsinthedecadesprecedingRoe.Duringthe1960sand1970s，amovementofmedical，publichealth，legal，religiousandwomen'sorganizationssuccessfullyurgedone-thirdofstatelegislaturestoliberalizetheirabortionstatutes.

　　Roev.Wadeisalandmarkdecisionthatrecognizedthattherighttomakechildbearingchoicesiscentraltowomen'slivesandtheirabilitytoparticipatefullyandequallyinsociety.Yet，theSupremeCourt'sdecisioninRoewasfarfromradical——itwasthelogicalextensionofHighCourtdecisionsontherighttoprivacydatingbacktotheturnofthecentury.Thedecisionisgroundedinthesamereasoningthatguaranteesourrighttorefusemedicaltreatmentandthefreedomtoresistgovernmentsearchandseizure.Infindingthattheconstitutionalrighttoprivacyencompassesawoman'srighttochoosewhetherornottocontinueapregnancy，theHighCourtcontinuedalonglineofdecisionsrecognizingarightofprivacythatprotectsintimateandpersonaldecisions——includingthoseaffectingchild-rearing，marriage，procreationandtheuseofcontraception——fromgovernmentalinterference.

　　TheDecision

　　Inits1973decisioninRoe，theSupremeCourtrecognizedthatawoman'srighttodecidewhethertocontinueherpregnancywasprotectedundertheconstitutionalprovisionsofindividualautonomyandprivacy.Forthefirsttime，Roeplacedwomen'sreproductivechoicealongsideotherfundamentalrights，suchasfreedomofspeechandfreedomofreligion，byconferringthehighestdegreeofconstitutionalprotection——"strictscrutiny"——tochoice.

　　Findinganeedtobalanceawoman'srighttoprivacywiththestate'sinterestinprotectingpotentiallife，theSupremeCourtestablishedatrimesterframeworkforevaluatingrestrictionsonabortion.TheCourtrequiredthestatetojustifyanyinterferencewiththeabortiondecisionbyshowingthatithada"compellinginterest"indoingso.Restrictionsonabortionsperformedbeforefetalviability，thatistheperiodbeforeafetuscanliveoutsideawoman'sbody，werelimitedtothosethatnarrowlyandpreciselypromotedrealmaternalhealthconcerns.Afterthepointofviability，thestatewasfreetobanabortionortakeotherstepstopromoteitsinterestinprotectingfetallife.Evenafterthatpoint，however，thestate'sinterestintheviablefetusmustyieldtothewoman'srighttohaveanabortiontoprotectherhealthandlife.

　　ImmediatelyfollowingtheRoedecision，thosewhodidnotwanttoseewomenparticipateequallyinsocietyweregalvanized.ThefarrightinitiatedapoliticalonslaughtthathasresultedinnumerousstateandfederalabortionrestrictionsandcontributedtoachangedSupremeCourt，ideologicallybentonevisceratingRoe.Therighttochoosebecamethetargetofnotonlythereligiousright，butalsoright-wingpoliticiansandjudgeswhousedtheRoedecisiontoattackthe"judicialactivism"oftheSupremeCourtanditspurportedfailuretoadheretothetextoftheConstitutionandthe"ori

ginalintent"ofitsframers.ThisbacklashreacheditspeakduringthethreetermsofPresidentsReaganandBush.Beginningin1983，theU.S.solicitorgeneralroutinelyurgedtheSupremeCourt，onbehalfofthefederalgovernment，tooverturnRoe.Inaddition，whenappointingSupremeCourtjustices，ReaganandBushusedoppositiontoRoeasalitmustest.Duringthistwelve-yearperiod，fivejustices-O'Connor，Scalia，Kennedy，Souter，andThomas-wereappointed.Notoneofthesefive，whostillconstituteamajorityontheCourttoday，supportsthe"strictscrutiny"standardofreviewestablishedbyRoe.

　　TheDismantlingofRoe

　　ShortlyaftertheRoedecision，statelegislaturesbeganpassinglawsinhopesofcreatingexceptionstoitoropeningupareasoflawthatRoedidnotdirectlyaddress.Nootherrighthasbeenfrontallyattackedandsosuccessfullyundermined，andallinthecourseoftwodecades——thesametwodecadesthatsustainedadvancesinotherareasofwomen'srights，includingeducationandemployment.

　　Teenagerswerethefirstsuccessfultarget.In1979theCourtendorsedstatelawsthatrequiredparentalconsent，aslongastheywereaccompaniedbyacomplicatedsystemwherebyminorscouldasserttheirprivacyrightsbyrequestingahearingbeforeastatejudgeonwhethertheywere"mature"oranabortionwasintheirbestinterests（Bellottiv.Baird）。

　　ThenextassaultonRoewasdirectedatlow-incomewomen.In1980theHydeAmendment，whichprohibitedMedicaidfromcoveringmostabortions，wasupheldbytheSupremeCourtbya5-4margin（Harrisv.McRae）。

TheCourtabandonedtheneutralityrequiredinRoe，findingthat，forpoorwomen，governmentcouldpromotechildbearingoverabortion，solongasitdidsobymanipulatingwomenthroughpublicfundingschemes，notcriminallaws.

　　DissentinginCityofAkronv.AkronCenterforReproductiveHealth（1983），JusticeO'ConnorcalledforaradicalerosionofRoeandproposedthatalesserstandardofconstitutionalprotectionforchoicebeestablished，calledthe"undueburden"standard，inplaceofthe"strictscrutiny"test.By1989，afterthearrivalofJusticesKennedyandScaliaandtheelevationofWilliamRehnquisttochiefjustice，therewerenolongerfivevotestopreservereproductivechoiceasafundamentalconstitutionalright.TheCourt'srulinginWebsterv.ReproductiveHealthServices（1989）demonstratedthisnewrealitywhenfivejusticesexpressedhostilitytowardRoeindifferingdegreesandessentiallycalledforstatestopasslegislationbanningabortioninordertotestthelaw.

　　Threeyearslater，inCasey，thestrictjudicialscrutinyestablishedinRoewasfinallyabandonedinapluralityopinionofJusticesO'Connor，KennedyandSouter.AlthoughtheCourtsaiditwasnotoverturningRoe'scentralpremisethatabortionisafundamentalright，theCaseydecisionreplacedtheoriginal"strictscrutiny"standardgoverningotherfundamentalrightsfortheweakandconfusingundueburdenstandard.Thisopenedthedoortoahostofstateandfederalcriminalrestrictionsdesignedtosteerwomenawayfromabortionandtopromotetherightsofthefetusthroughoutpregnancy.Over300criminalabortionrestrictionshavebeenenactedbylegislaturesinthepastsixyearsalone，noneofwhichwouldhavebeenconstitutionalundertheoriginalRoedecision.

　　TheFourPillarsofRoe

　　TheRoeopinionwasgroundedonfourconstitutionalpillars：

（1）thedecisiontohaveanabortionwasaccordedthehighestlevelofconstitutionalprotectionlikeanyotherfundamentalconstitutionalright；

（2）thegovernmenthadtostayneutral；legislaturescouldnotenactlawsthatpushedwomentomakeonedecisionoranother；（3）intheperiodbeforethefetusisviable，thegovernmentmayrestrictabortiononlytoprotectawoman'shealth；（4）afterviability，thegovernmentmayprohi

bitabortion，butlawsmustmakeexceptionsthatpermitabortionwhennecessarytoprotectawoman'shealthorlife.

　　OnlytwoofthefourRoepillarsremaintodayasaresultoftheSupremeCourt's1992decisioninPlannedParenthoodofSoutheasternPennsylvaniav.Casey.Thisdecisionistheculminationofasteadydeclineinconstitutionalprotectionfortherighttoprivacy.Awoman'srighttochooseisstillconstitutionallyprotected，however，the"strictscrutiny"standardwasjettisonedinfavorofalesserstandardofprotectionforreproductivechoicecalled"undueburden."UnderCasey，stateandlocallawsthatfavorfetalrightsandburdenawoman'schoicetohaveabortionarepermitted，solongastheburdenisnot"undue."Nolongerdoesthestatehavetobeneutralinthechoiceofabortionorchildbearing.Nowthegovernmentisfreetopasslawsrestrictingabortionbasedon"morality，"acodewordforreligiousanti-abortionviews.Statesarenowpermittedtodisfavorabortionandpunishwomenseekingabortions，eventhosewhoareyoungandsick，withharassinglaws.

　　Roeinthe21stCentury

　　In2000，eightyearsaftertheCaseydecision，theCourtagreedtohearanothercasethatopenedupRoeforreexamination.Duringthatperiod，PresidentClintonhadappointedtwojustices，GinsburgandBreyer.ThefirstchallengetoRoeinthe21stcenturycameintheformofaNebraskabanonso-called"partial-birthabortion"broughtbytheCenterforReproductiveLawandPolicy.ThelanguageoftheNebraskaban——andthecookie-cutterversionspassedin30states——wassweepingandbroad，andcouldhaveincludedvirtuallyallabortionprocedures，eventhoseusedintheearlyweeksofpregnancy.Publicly，however，supportersofthesebanscamouflagedthisfactbyusingatermmadeupbytheNationalRight-to-Life

Committee——"partial-birthabortion"——andpretendingthatthebansweredesignedtopreventdoctorsfromusingoneparticularprocedure.

　　Ina5-4voteinthecaseStenbergv.Carhart（2000）