Roe V Wade on the Cards – Will the Supreme Court Overturn?

1108

In the week, the Supreme Court has witnessed a flood of amicus curiae papers, as attorneys and academics hurry to stress the fatal flaws in the 1973 Roe v. Wade judgment and its related cases.

For instance, legal scholars Mary Ann Glendon & O. Carter Snead describe how well the Supreme Court’s existing reproductive reasoning reinforces in law a notion of human existence and development. This is not only unconstitutionally improper, but also incorrect and destructive.

Democracy Should Be Allowed to Take its Course

The brief proclaims that jurisprudence is clearly ridiculous and unjust rules and regulations should be overturned. The American people are allowed to join the clear majority of countries around the world in which residents have been allowed to come to terms with this disputed matter via ordinary democratic structures.


The Supreme Court’s abortion doctrine is totally divorced from the Constitution and Bill of Rights text, background, and practice, according to the brief. It has forced on the country for years an excessive, illogical, unsustainable, and dictatorial legal regime for abortions.

The specific scenario, according to Glendon and Snead, offers the purest possibility for the Court to rethink its severely flawed and damaging reasoning since Roe v. Wade was established in 1973.

Likewise, the Ethical and Public Policy Institute (EPPC) declared in a statement submitted on Thursday it was no surprise that Roe is not just erroneous, but gravely so. Roe was nearly universally attacked as erroneous the day it was pronounced; it has been vehemently opposed both inside and outside the court ever since, with no serving justice defending the virtues of the underlying argument.

In essence, the EPPC brief claims that Roe’s misrule has proven that the biggest permanent challenge to the court’s credibility is Roe himself. It goes on to say that the language of the 14th Amendment does not even suggest a right to have an abortion and generations that enacted the Fourteenth Amendment decisively stopped the practice of elective abortion/termination.

The Truth is Roe V Wade is Outdated

From a different angle, the American University of Pediatricians, as well as the Affiliation of American Doctors and Nurses, submitted a brief on Thursday. They argued that Roe v. Wade, as well as Planned Parenthood v. Casey, relied on minimal evidence about fetal development. Whereas scientific understanding now has surpassed Roe and Casey and should be considered when reliving the above rulings.

According to the brief, scientific understanding of embryonic development was relatively restricted when Roe v. Wade was determined in 1973. Even more minimal evidence was presented to this court. There was no recorded information about the scientific and medical condition of the unborn baby in Roe or its sister case, Doe v. Bolton.

According to the submission, what we would now understand as undisputed proven truth is that a fetus grows far more swiftly than the court assumed in Roe. The unborn child is a distinct human being from fertilization until viability, rapidly developing the capabilities and shape of a child.