Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mucifer

(23,525 posts)
Sun May 12, 2013, 09:36 AM May 2013

Justice Ginsburg: Roe v. Wade not 'woman-centered'

Forty years after the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade case legalized abortion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the case is not her "ideal picture" for resolving the controversial issue of abortion.

Instead, the landmark decision gave abortion-rights opponents a rallying point that is still used today, Ginsburg — the second female justice ever appointed to the court — told a packed crowd Saturday at the University of Chicago Law School auditorium.


In that case, U.S. Air Force Cpt. Susan Struck became pregnant in 1970 while serving in Vietnam. Ginsburg, who at the time represented Struck as a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, said the woman had two choices: leave the military or have a legal abortion on base.


"The idea was: 'Government, stay out of this,' " Ginsburg said. "I wish that would have been the first case. The court would have better understood this is a question of a woman's choice."


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-justice-ginsburg-roe-v-wade-not-womancentered-20130511,0,3079568.story

It's an interesting article.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
1. I think she's flat out wrong.
Sun May 12, 2013, 09:38 AM
May 2013

she makes the case that without Roe, abortion would be more accessible. I don't buy it for a nanosecond.

Sekhmets Daughter

(7,515 posts)
3. That was not her point...
Sun May 12, 2013, 09:52 AM
May 2013

She makes the case that Roe v Wade is about doctors and not the right of a woman to choose... I think she is flat out 100% correct!

Roe v Wade could have overturned the Texas law, and paved the way for more states to legalize abortion. Eventually a case would have been argued that it is a woman's right to choose for herself. Roe V Wade buried the chances of such a case being argued before the court. That is her point. Just look at what has been happening over the past 40 years and particularly over the past decade!

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
6. I think you completely missed her point. She is correct--Roe is doctor, not woman-centered, and the
Sun May 12, 2013, 09:57 AM
May 2013

Air Force case might have been better.

Her arguments in Frontiero were brilliant.

CTyankee

(63,901 posts)
4. I get her point but I still think that even with a state by state approach there would have
Sun May 12, 2013, 09:52 AM
May 2013

been a furious backlash at each state level.

The fact is that women were dying of illegal abortions, pre-Roe. Once Roe was decided, women stopped dying from illegal abortions. It was a dramatic decrease. I am glad that those lives were saved.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
5. If you read the text of Roe, you'll notice she's right.
Sun May 12, 2013, 09:56 AM
May 2013

Roe is more about the privacy of decisions between doctors and patients than it is about abortions specifically.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
7. Exactly, Roe was about privacy
Sun May 12, 2013, 10:18 AM
May 2013

And has even been cited in many privacy cases argued before the court.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Justice Ginsburg: Roe v. ...