The Daily The Legal Vulnerability of Roe v. Wade
May 20, 2019
In this engaging discussion, Adam Liptak, Supreme Court correspondent for The New York Times, shares his insights into the precarious state of Roe v. Wade. He explains the difference between inferred rights and guaranteed rights and how this distinction threatens abortion legality. The conversation delves into the evolving interpretations of privacy rights, the influence of state laws, and the political landscape surrounding reproductive rights. Liptak highlights how the current conservative court may approach future cases that could chip away at these rights.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Roe v. Wade's Basis
- The constitutional right to abortion, established in Roe v. Wade, was based on the Griswold v. Connecticut ruling on contraception.
- This ruling inferred a right to privacy from various constitutional amendments, a concept criticized for being legally unsound.
Roe's Legal Strategy
- The Roe v. Wade ruling relied on the right to privacy established in Griswold v. Connecticut, extending it to abortion.
- An alternative legal strategy based on equal protection was considered but not pursued due to lack of legal precedent at the time.
Growing Opposition to Roe
- Initial reactions to Roe v. Wade were mild, but opposition grew, focusing on the Supreme Court's establishment of a constitutional right.
- This opposition solidified Roe as a symbol of illegitimate judicial overreach, especially among conservative and religious groups.