How Supreme Court went from Roe v. Wade to drafting opinion to overturn it

To protect the federal government against the right to abortion Endured legal Task For almost half a century. But the Supreme Court’s draft opinion came this week, Abnormal leakShowing the High Court Ready to beat that long-standing precedent..

The draft shows a surprising change from the courts that became much more conservative during the Trump administration, even though Americans grew widely. More liberal Years since the abortion decision in the Roe v. Wade case in 1973 and the planned parent-child relationship vs. Casey case in 1992.

Judge John Roberts said: The first draft, written by the conservative Judge Samuel Alito and reportedly circulated in February, does not represent the final decision in this case. However, the early leak of opinion, which overturns nearly 50 years of precedent, represents the culmination of decades of efforts by activists and lawmakers to challenge abortion at all levels. Individual To the constitution.

Let’s see what led to this moment.

In him Draft opinion on page 98Arito turned to the history of abortion policy in the United States to support his conclusion that Law and Casey “must be rejected.”

Arito wrote that abortion is not a constitutionally protected right, noting that the constitution itself does not refer to abortion. While the courts allowed the Fourteenth Amendment to interpret and guarantee rights that were not clearly explained, Arito said that these rights were deeply rooted in American tradition and “implied in the concept of orderly freedom.” I have quoted a case that states that it needs to be.

“The right to abortion does not fall into this category,” said Arito’s draft. “Until the second half of the 20th century, there was no support for American law for the constitutional right to have an abortion. Zero. None.”

Judges said abortion was outlawed in three-quarters of the states when the Article 14 amendment was adopted in the 1860s, and 30 states were at all stages of pregnancy when Roe was discussed in court. Wrote that abortion was banned.

However, the American Historical Association, which boasts the largest organization of its kind in the world, 2021 Court Overview “American history and tradition under the common law supports the claim that women in the Roe v. Wade case of choosing abortion have constitutional rights.”

The group said early Americans followed the British common law, which did not regulate abortion before fetal movement was detected. He added that it was at the time when the fetus was legally recognized to exist separately from pregnant women, and common law reasoning about abortion continued in most states until the civil war.

In the mid-1800s, with the help of American Medical Association doctors, abortion laws became stricter in many states. According to the group, they were partially driven by Catholic immigrants and fear of female fertility avoiding motherhood.

American Law History Society Another overview He told the High Court that abortions continued after these laws were passed and accelerated during the Great Depression. As a result, some hospitals have created a reason to allow abortion, “destabilizing the already controversial situation,” the organization said.

Advances in medicine in the mid-20th century have made pregnancy and childbirth much safer for women and reduced the prevalence of abortion as a life-saving procedure. As a result, the risk of prosecution by an abortion doctor has increased. The group said it urged many doctors to seek deregulation of abortion in the 1960s.

By the early 1970s, according to Brief, “both pro-life groups and pro-choice groups have begun to engage in constitutional debate.”

January 1973, Supreme Court With a ruling of 7-2 He claimed that the right to privacy was conveyed by the Due Process Clause of the Article 14 amendment, which allowed the choice of abortion until the fetus was able to survive. The line explaining when the fetus could live outside the womb was thought to be about 24 weeks after conception.

The court ruled that the government “has legitimate interests in protecting both the health of pregnant women and the potential of human life,” and said the balance of these interests would change during each semester of pregnancy. rice field.

In a 1976 decision Planned parent-child relationship v.DanforceThe court has revoked part of Missouri’s abortion law, which requires women seeking abortion to provide the written consent of their spouse or, if unmarried, parents under the age of 18. ..

Four years later, Harris v McRae’s judge upheld the Hyde amendment to limit the use of federal Medicaid dollars to fund abortions.

Websterv. In ReproductiveHealthServices, a court ruled that the Missouri State Act of 1986 banned the use of public resources to carry out abortions, and women seeking abortions were at least 20 weeks pregnant.

In 1990, a Hodgson v. Minnesota court ruled that state law provisions denying access to abortion to women under the age of 18 were unconstitutional until at least 48 hours after their parents were notified. bottom.

The court was Rust v in 1991. In Sullivan, the federal government has ruled that the title X family planning grant is allowed to specify that it cannot be used for abortion-related services.

The court has ruled an abortion case since Casey. This includes a 2007 ruling in favor of a federal ban on late abortion and, more recently, a ruling allowing a challenge to Texas’s restrictive abortion law. Proceed to federal court..

But even before Arito’s draft opinion leaked, the Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was seen as the most important challenge to the right to abortion in decades.

The case focused on Mississippi law, which bans almost all abortions after 15 weeks of gestation, and directly called on the court to overthrow Roe and Casey.

The case was discussed in a 6-3 conservative majority court after the appointment of three judges appointed by former President Donald Trump.

Court conservatives in December oral arguments Seemed ready to eradicate Roe and Casey.. Liberal judges warned that revoking the right to abortion for decades would destroy public perceptions of the courts.

Arito’s draft opinion argued that the court’s “terribly wrong” decision on abortion had already had “harmful consequences.”

“And instead of providing a national solution to the abortion problem, Roe and Casey intensified the debate and deepened the division,” wrote Alito.

The American Legal History Society objected with a summary of its own “friends of the court” submitted to Dobbs.

“The dispute over the right to abortion has certainly escalated since Law was decided, but the bitterness and obvious difficulty of the debate is the polarization of the parties, the negative partisanship, and the nomination of the Supreme Court. It stems from many other factors, including political change, “said the organization.

Recent research shows that most Americans most often support the right to abortion. The majority of adults oppose most abortions in states that are ready to immediately outlaw procedures in the event of Roe’s capsizing. According to the New York Times..

Thirteen states have passed the so-called trigger law, which does exactly that.Up to 26 states Expected to impose new restrictions on abortion If Roe and Casey are actually defeated A major reproductive advocacy group.

Dobbs’ final opinion is expected to be issued near the end of the court’s term in late June or early July.