RoeVWade英文及中文.docx

RoeVWade英文及中文.docx

《RoeVWade英文及中文.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《RoeVWade英文及中文.docx（9页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

RoeVWade英文及中文

Roe-V.Wade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，theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtstruckdownthe

StateofTexas'scriminalabortionlaws，findingthattherighttodecide

whethertohaveachildisafundamentalrightguaranteedbytheU.S.

Constitution.The7-2decisioninRoev.WadewouldhaveanimmediateandprofoundeffectonthelivesofAmericanwomen.BeforeRoe，itisestimated

that"between200，000and1.2millionillegallyinducedabortionsoccur[red]annuallyintheUnitedStates."1Asmanyas5，000to10，000womendiedper

yearfollowingillegalabortionsandmanyotherssufferedseverephysicalandpsychologicalinjury.2

Topreventwomenfromdyingorinjuringthemselvesfromunsafe，illegal

orself-inducedabortions，women'sadvocatesspearheadedcampaignsto

reversecentury-oldcriminalabortionlawsinthedecadesprecedingRoe.

Duringthe1960sand1970s，amovementofmedical，publichealth，legal，

religiousandwomen'sorganizationssuccessfullyurgedone-thirdofstate

legislaturestoliberalizetheirabortionstatutes.

Roev.Wadeisalandmarkdecisionthatrecognizedthattherighttomakechildbearingchoicesiscentraltowomen'slivesandtheirabilitytoparticipate

fullyandequallyinsociety.Yet

theSupremeCourt'sdecisioninRoewasfar

fromradical

itwasthelogicalextensionofHighCourtdecisionsontherighttoprivacydatingbacktotheturnofthecentury.Thedecisionis

groundedinthesamereasoningthatguaranteesourrighttorefusemedicaltreatmentandthefreedomtoresistgovernmentsearchandseizure.Infindingthattheconstitutionalrighttoprivacyencompassesawoman'srighttochoosewhetherornottocontinueapregnancy，theHighCourtcontinuedalonglineofdecisionsrecognizingarightofprivacythatprotectsintimateandpersonaldecisions——includingthoseaffectingchild-rearing，marriage，procreationandtheuseofcontraception——fromgovernmentalinterference.

TheDecision

Inits1973decisioninRoe，theSupremeCourtrecognizedthatawoman's

righttodecidewhethertocontinueherpregnancywasprotectedundertheconstitutionalprovisionsofindividualautonomyandprivacy.Forthefirsttime，Roeplacedwomen'sreproductivechoicealongsideotherfundamentalrights，suchasfreedomofspeechandfreedomofreligion，byconferringthe

highestdegreeofconstitutionalprotection——"strictscrutiny"——tochoice.

Findinganeedtobalanceawoman'srighttoprivacywiththestate's

interestinprotectingpotentiallife，theSupremeCourtestablishedatrimester

frameworkforevaluatingrestrictionsonabortion.TheCourtrequiredthestatetojustifyanyinterferencewiththeabortiondecisionbyshowingthatithada"compellinginterest"indoingso.Restrictionsonabortionsperformed

beforefetalviability

thatistheperiodbeforeafetuscanliveoutsidea

woman'sbody，werelimitedtothosethatnarrowlyandpreciselypromotedrealmaternalhealthconcerns.Afterthepointofviability，thestatewasfreeto

banabortionortakeotherstepstopromoteitsinterestinprotectingfetallife.Evenafterthatpoint，however，thestate'sinterestintheviablefetusmustyieldtothewoman'srighttohaveanabortiontoprotectherhealthandlife.

ImmediatelyfollowingtheRoedecision，thosewhodidnotwanttosee

womenparticipateequallyinsocietyweregalvanized.ThefarrightinitiatedapoliticalonslaughtthathasresultedinnumerousstateandfederalabortionrestrictionsandcontributedtoachangedSupremeCourt，ideologicallybent

onevisceratingRoe.Therighttochoosebecamethetargetofnotonlythereligiousright，butalsoright-wingpoliticiansandjudgeswhousedtheRoedecisiontoattackthe"judicialactivism"oftheSupremeCourtanditspurportedfailuretoadheretothetextoftheConstitutionandthe"originalintent"ofitsframers.ThisbacklashreacheditspeakduringthethreetermsofPresidentsReaganandBush.Beginningin1983，theU.S.solicitorgeneralroutinelyurgedtheSupremeCourt，onbehalfofthefederal

government，tooverturnRoe.Inaddition，whenappointingSupremeCourtjustices，ReaganandBushusedoppositiontoRoeasalitmustest.Duringthistwelve-yearperiod，fivejustices-O'Connor，Scalia，Kennedy，Souter，andThomas-wereappointed.Notoneofthesefive，whostillconstitutea

majorityontheCourttoday，supportsthe"strictscrutiny"standardofreview

establishedbyRoe.

TheDismantlingofRoe

ShortlyaftertheRoedecision,statelegislaturesbeganpassinglawsinhopesofcreatingexceptionstoitoropen!

ngupareasoflawthatRoedidnotdirectlyaddress.Nootherrighthasbeenfrontal"attackedandsosuccessfullyundermined,andallinthecourseoftwodecadesthesametwodecades

thatsustainedadvancesinotherareasofwomen'srights,ineludingeducationandemployment.

Teenagerswerethefirstsuccessfultarget.In1979theCourtendorsedstatelawsthatrequiredparentalconsent,aslongastheywereaccompaniedbyacomplicatedsystemwherebyminorscouldasserttheirprivacyrightsbyrequest!

ngahearingbeforeastatejudgeonwhethertheywere”mature”oranabortionwasintheirbestinterests（Bellottiv.Baird）。

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

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

DissentinginCityofAkronv.AkronCenterforReproductiveHealth（1983）,JusticeO'ConnorcalledforaradicalerosionofRoeandproposed

thatalesserstandardofconstitutionalprotectionforchoicebeestablished,calledthe"undueburderfstandard,inplaceofthe"strictscrutiny11test.By1989,afterthearrivalofJusticesKennedyandScaliaandtheelevationofWilliamRehnquisttochiefjustice,therewerenolongerfivevotestopreservereproductivechoiceasafundamentalconstitutionalright.TheCourt'srulinginWebsterv.ReproductiveHealthServices（1989）demonstratedthisnewrealitywhenfivejusticesexpressedhostilitytowardRoeindifferingdegreesandessentiallycalledforstatestopasslegislationbanningabortioninordertotestthelaw.

Threeyearslater,inCasey,thestrictjudicialscrutinyestablishedinRoewasfinallyabandonedinapluralityopinionofJusticesO'Connor,KennedyandSouter.AlthoughtheCourtsaiditwasnotoverturningRoe*scentralpremisethatabortionisafundamentalright,theCaseydecisionreplacedtheoriginalnstrictscrutiny"standardgoverningotherfundamentalrightsfortheweakandconfusingundueburdenstandard.Thisopenedthedoortoahostofstateandfederalcriminalrestrictionsdesignedtosteerwomenawayfromabortionandtopromotetherightsofthefetusthroughoutpregnancy.Over300criminalabortionrestrictionshavebeenenactedbylegislaturesinthepastsixyearsalone,noneofwhichwouldhavebeenconstitutionalundertheoriginalRoedecision.

TheFourPillarsofRoe

TheRoeopinionwasgroundedonfourconstitutionalpillars：

（1）thedecisiontohaveanabortionwasaccordedthehighestlevelofconstitutional

2）the

protectionlikeanyotherfundamentalconstitutionalright

governmenthadtostayneutral；legislaturescouldnotenactlawsthatpushed

womentomakeonedecisionoranother；（3）intheperiodbeforethefetus

isviable，thegovernmentmayrestrictabortiononlytoprotectawoman'shealth；（4）afterviability，thegovernmentmayprohibitabortion，butlawsmustmakeexceptionsthatpermitabortionwhennecessarytoprotectawoman'shealthorlife.

OnlytwoofthefourRoepillarsremaintodayasaresultoftheSupreme

Court's1992decisioninPlannedParenthoodofSoutheasternPennsylvaniav.

Casey.Thisdecisionistheculminationofasteadydeclineinconstitutionalprotectionfortherighttoprivacy.Awoman'srighttochooseisstillconstitutionallyprotected，however，the"strictscrutiny"standardwasjettisonedinfavorofalesserstandardofprotectionforreproductivechoicecalled"undueburden."UnderCasey，stateandlocallawsthatfavorfetal

rightsandburdenawoman'schoicetohaveabortionarepermitted，solong

astheburdenisnot"undue."Nolongerdoesthestatehavetobeneutralinthechoiceofabortionorchildbearing.Nowthegovernmentisfreetopasslawsrestrictingabortionbasedon"morality，"acodewordforreligious

anti-abortionviews.Statesarenowpermittedtodisfavorabortionandpunishwomenseekingabortions，eventhosewhoareyoungandsick，withharassinglaws.

Roeinthe21stCentury

In2000，eightyearsaftertheCaseydecision，theCourtagreedtohear

anothercasethatopenedupRoeforreexamination.Duringthatperiod，

PresidentClintonhadappointedtwojustices，GinsburgandBreyer.ThefirstchallengetoRoeinthe21stcenturycameintheformofaNebraskabanonso-called"partial-birthabortion"broughtbytheCenterforReproductiveLawandPolicy.ThelanguageoftheNebraskaban——andthecookie-cutter

versionspassedin30states——wassweepingandbroad，andcouldhave

includedvirtuallyallabortionprocedures，eventhoseusedintheearlyweeks

ofpregnancy.Publicly，however，supportersofthesebanscamouflagedthisfactbyusingatermmadeupbytheNationalRight-to-LifeCommittee——"partial-birthabortion"——andpretendingthatthebansweredesignedtopreventdoctorsfr