Fifty years ago American Supreme Court has made a very controversial and remarkable judgment in Roe vs. Wade case. Since abortion was banned in many states including Texas except for certain restricted circumstances. And unintended pregnancy may occur in cases like a failure of contraception or in cases of alcohol abuse, as happened in Joe’s case. So, the case was presented after extensive efforts on part of Roe’s lawyer. After extensive debate in court, the court has made the decision in favor of Roe. And, Taxa’s “anti-abortion law” was deemed as against the spirit of the “Constitution of U.S.A”. The verdict made by the court was an interpretation of the fourteenth amendment, which guarantees personal freedom to American citizens and is in accordance with “ninth amendment” which guarantees women to be free to make a decision to terminate the pregnancy.
The liberal activist and feminist who advocated abortion had celebrated the decision. In fact a popular slogan “my body my choice” was also being raised at that time. And, the judicial and political activism brought success to their cause. However, the conservative part of America had always been raising voices against abortion as against the spirit of Christian values. The divisive opinion had always been there regarding termination of pregnancy and, obviously, various cliques have their own opinions. Moreover, the case was often challenged in judiciary circles for being considered an act of “judicial activism”, despite attaining a “rightful verdict”. And, whether, Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction over the case or whether, it shall be heard under Texas state law. However, the plea taken by Joe’s lawyer indicated that Texas state law was against the “Constitution of USA”. And, the court passed a decision in favor though, and the court disregarded the issues regarding jurisdiction.
However, in a very recent development, the Supreme court has made a decision. The decision was overturned as the court upheld Mississippi law which states that “bans abortion after 15 weeks”. The ruling was passed in 6 (in favor) and 3 (against). Thus, limiting the pregnancy debate. The decision was significant as it has caused an enormous outrage among a large portion of young activists, who advocate the right to abortion. Democrat President, Joe Biden has called the decision: “a sad day in American history”. And, Republicans had taken a more conservative stance, thus celebrating the court’s decision. The aftermath of the decision is that, now, states can ban abortion following the precedent set by Supreme Court’s decision.
Importantly, what it tells about American polity and concentration of power, is that the conservative right is largely gaining feet at the helms of power. Since such a decision that is contradictory to previous interpretations made by the court was unprecedented and not expected by any means. Since the decision is being made, more threats are being perceived by many who think, this is only a precursor to a few nascent developments that are yet to be seen. Like, access to contraception could be banned in the near future and same-sex marriage could also be subjected to extensive legal debate, which is being seen aversely by the political conservative right. Thus, divisiveness in American polity and society is quite evident. This raises certain questions about future developments in the socio-political milieu which we have yet to witness.
One thought on “Roe vs. Wade: What it means for the American polity”
No doubt, the nature of two cases presented to arbitrary, was pretty analogous but still we see a broadside in final decry which is a question mark? But we can also keep this thing in mind before corroborating the final judgement that these cases may also be influenced by the contemporary time and updated regulations related to them. However, the case is crucial in this sense that it is not only related to one gender but it can also influence the homosexual group of people’s of America to stand against it, so it can not be kept in abeyance and a clear cut firm should be made or it should be handed over to UNDHR keeping the severity of case in view.