Abortion and Democracy in America by Peter Singer

Following the United States Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, who established a constitutional right to abortion, many speculate which rights the court will take away next. In fact, the rationale for the decision to reject half a century of case law implies that the Court has too much power.

MELBOURNE – Every woman should have the legal right to safely terminate a pregnancy she does not wish to continue, at least until very late in the pregnancy when the fetus is developed enough to feel pain. This has been my view ever since I started thinking about it as an undergraduate student in the 1960s. gave me reason enough to change my mind.

Yet I find it difficult to disagree with the central reasoning of the United States Supreme Court majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the decision annulling Roe vs. Wadethe landmark 1973 case that established a constitutional right to abortion. This reasoning begins with the indisputable fact that the U.S. Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and the perhaps questionable, but still very reasonable assertion that the right to abortion is also not implicit in any constitutional provision, including the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The reasoning behind the decision to deer Removing the power to prohibit abortion from state legislatures was clearly on shaky ground. Judge Byron White was right: the deer The majority decision, he wrote in his dissenting opinion in the case, was “the exercise of crude judicial power.”

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – free.



Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Comments are closed.