From the Supreme Court ruling:
'Jane Roe, a single woman who was residing in Dallas County, Texas, instituted this federal action in March 1970 against the District Attorney of the county. She sought a declaratory judgment that the Texas criminal abortion statutes were unconstitutional on their face, and an injunction restraining the defendant from enforcing the statutes.
Roe alleged that she was unmarried and pregnant; that she wished to terminate her pregnancy by an abortion "performed by a competent, licensed physician, under safe, clinical conditions"; that she was unable to get a "legal" abortion in Texas because her life did not appear to be threatened by the continuation of her pregnancy; and that she could not afford to travel to another jurisdiction in order to secure a legal abortion under safe conditions. She claimed that the Texas statutes were unconstitutionally vague and that they abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. By an amendment to her complaint Roe purported to sue "on behalf of herself and all other women" similarly situated.'
Roe also claimed that her pregnancy was the result of rape, but the justices did not consider that in their decision, and Roe later retracted the rape story.
There were other parties to the suit as well, a Dr. Hallford who performed abortions, and a married couple known as John and Jane Doe, who wished to remain childless by choice. The Supreme court ruled that the Does and Hallford had no standing to sue.
2006-10-13 07:16:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Keith P 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It was over a woman's right to have an abortion. Prior to this women would have back alley procedures and often die as a result.
2006-10-13 07:58:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Florida Girl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋