Roe vs. Wade is our case?!?

[Shardik]

An interesting choice to say the least.  I'm not surprised that we are going to study the case, just that it was chosen for orientation.  I'm actually happy about it as it  shows that the school is not afraid to just "jump right in" and challenge both us and our preconceptions. 

What do you guys think?  Or am I the only one who thought we would get a slightly  more mundane case.

[swimmy]

i think its an interesting choice....i am looking forward to reading it.  so are we supposed to just read and be familiar with the case or are we expected to brief the case as if we were preparing for class...what are everyones thoughts...what is everyone else going to do??

-swimmy

[YankyKitten]

I'm not going to Florida, but my orientation cases from Widener say to read and "prepare"  so I'm going to brief them (or at least try to).

Oh... I'm jealous, I would love to be discussing Roe v Wade; it is an interesting case from a procedural stand point in that is it one of the very few cases that the SC decided on which was moot.  Good luck!

[Shardik]

I'm going to brief it, but after reading the case i have no idea where to start!  I know about IRAC but there are so many issues (and sup issues) that i'm not sure how detailed it should be.  My mother is an attorney so i'm going to go sit down with her tonight and disucss it.  I'll let you guys know what/how i do.

[jamieb131]

I just checked my email and saw this assignment... I honestly have no idea where to begin. I think it's a very interesting choice for our first case discussion at orientation, but after skimming the first few pages of the case, I can see this is going to be harder than I thought.

I don't know whether we're supposed to just read it and be able to discuss it or if we are supposed to try to brief it. I think I'm going to try to brief the case, although I have no clue how to do that either.

[dkast]

From my undergraduate constitutional law course at NYU i recall this case being straigh forward as far as how the court applied the law to reach its decision.  Its been a few years though.

[rapunzel]

I read the case for the first time 2L and it struck me that the national debate we have about abortion is completely attenuated from the actual tenants of the case.  It's a great read, but I'm glad it was not my introduction to caselaw.
The High Court Case Briefs have a very good summary of the case.  I'd check that out.  It will help those of you who have to narrow the case down to the essentials so you will know how to focus your brief.

[swimmy]

So the early consensus is to read over the case and make an attempt to brief it (to the best of our ability).  I suppose that if nothing else this will be good practice when we actually have to do the "real thing". 

-Swimmy

[Shardik]

Ok, so I’m thinking two issues here: (if you can do that!?)

   1. Whether the Unites States Constitution provides a right to privacy that encompass a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy.
   2. Whether States have a "compelling state interest" in overriding that right to privacy for the sake of the fetus's potential life.

the answer to 1. is yes

the answer to 2. is yes/no and viability is the key.  In the early stages of pregnancy the woman’s right to privacy is paramount, but later in the pregnancy the viability of fetus takes precedence and the woman’s protected right is forfeit to a "compelling state interest" to protect potential life.

  damn, it may be wrong but when i type it out like that it doesn't sound half bad!

what do you think?

[rapunzel]

Yes you can have two issues, but the first issue would cover the whole thing with compleeling state interest being a part of your rule of law. 
Sounds like you've done just fine getting through the case.