Law School Discussion

Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade

ElizaB

  • ****
  • 1169
  • What a sweet face?
    • View Profile
Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« on: February 13, 2005, 11:45:29 AM »
I just heard about this for the first time today in church.  Apparently, the Supreme Court will be reconsidering its decision about Roe v. Wade on Feb 18th for the first time since the initial decision.

TrojanChispas

  • ****
  • 4667
  • , a worthy adversary
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2005, 12:39:27 PM »
that's wild.  why would they do that?  have alink?

ElizaB

  • ****
  • 1169
  • What a sweet face?
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2005, 01:58:55 PM »
I highly doubt that they will reverse the decision and don't know much about it other than what the preacher at my church said this morning.  The preacher (Max Lucado) is a pretty well-known preacher and author...at least in this part of the country...and is on some sort of religous advisory committee for Bush.  This morning he said in the sermon that he had heard that the SC would be reconsidering Roe v Wade on the 18th for the first time since its initial passage and to keep the situation in our prayers.  Don't know much about it other than that and actually had not heard anything about it otherwise in the news...but it seems like a pretty big deal to me. 

ginthailand

  • ***
  • 50
  • I'll take the case...
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2005, 02:07:30 PM »
Is there another case before the court that addresses the same issues of privacy that Roe does?  I don't believe the Supreme Court simply reviews previous decisions without some compelling legal reason; in other words, another case that raises similar issues may lead them to depart from stare decisis because of "evolving societal standards" (or,in the case of a departure from Roe, "de-evolving societal standards").  This sounds like another pipe dream of the religious right.

Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2005, 02:35:34 PM »
Clearly your information is wrong. The Supreme Court isn't even having oral arguments on February 18. You can see their 2004-2005 argument calendar here, on their website.

Summaries of the cases can be found at Duke Law School's fantastic Supreme Court website. I looked up all the February cases except the ones obviously not about abortion (i.e. It's probably not in Exxon Mobile vs. Saudi Basic Industries), and none of them involve anything even close to abortion.

Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2005, 03:14:40 PM »
Without being versed on what's on the docket, I think that the latest considerations of the partial-birth abortion bans in some states are scheduled to reach the SC this year.  Can anyone confirm this?  If so, can the court use this to overturn Roe?

ginthailand

  • ***
  • 50
  • I'll take the case...
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2005, 03:33:38 PM »
Oyez (http://www.oyez.org/oyez/portlet/oralArgumentCalendar/) has a pretty decent website listing pending cases.  It doesn't list anything regarding privacy or abortion, but there is an interesting case involving Johnnie Cochran as the respondent.  Apparently, not all of his clients were as satisfied as O.J.

If you have some time to kill or are interested in legal pleadings, the law firm representing Cochran has links to the petitioners' and respondent's briefs here: http://www.nemecek-cole.com/cochran_vs_tory.htm


giffy

  • ****
  • 1578
  • Mo
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2005, 04:31:26 PM »
I think he may be refering to this
http://www.operationoutcry.org/01-05_updates/FINAL-FINAL%20Roe%20PR%20J05%20_2_.pdf

Apperently McCorvey (Jane Roe) is pettioning the court to overturn there desicion on the basis of new evidence. It is highly unlikely that she will succeed.

BigTex

Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2005, 06:31:43 PM »
Regardless of how those on the supreme court feel about Roe v. Wade personally, i'd imagine they'd be extremely reluctant to overturn it. Doing so would sort of destory the awe with which the SC is held. If the SC could rule one way and just 30-some odd years later rule a completely opposite way, that doesn't say much for the intellectual rigor of the SC as an institution. As much as some of the justices may dislike abortion, i'd imagine they would dislike a chaotic SC history even more.

Just continual nipping at the edges (forced parental notification, 48 hr. waiting period, etc.) are much more likely to be haggled over. I just don't see an outright overturning any time soon.

Of course, i haven't even been to LS yet though ...

Re: Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v Wade
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2005, 06:43:19 PM »
Regardless of how those on the supreme court feel about Roe v. Wade personally, i'd imagine they'd be extremely reluctant to overturn it. Doing so would sort of destory the awe with which the SC is held. If the SC could rule one way and just 30-some odd years later rule a completely opposite way, that doesn't say much for the intellectual rigor of the SC as an institution. As much as some of the justices may dislike abortion, i'd imagine they would dislike a chaotic SC history even more.

Just continual nipping at the edges (forced parental notification, 48 hr. waiting period, etc.) are much more likely to be haggled over. I just don't see an outright overturning any time soon.

Of course, i haven't even been to LS yet though ...

This happens all the time, actually.  The most noteworthy example is Plessy v. Ferguson (established separate but equal) and Board v. Board of Education (striking down separate but equal).  It was 62 years between the two. 

The court also flip-flopped in the 70's on the issue of the death penalty.  In 1972 in the case of Furman v. Georgia, the SCOTUS declared the death penalty to be cruel and unusual.  Just four years later the court flip-flopped.  Instead of nibbling, they took big bites in two different directions.

Besides, Roe is bad law and bad science.  It's way overdue to be struck down.