Pro-choice law clerk: Roe V Wade “borders on the indefensible”

Edward Lazarus, former law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored the Roe V Wade decision:

“As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible. I say this as someone utterly committed to the right to choose, as someone who believes such a right has grounding elsewhere in the Constitution instead of where Roe placed it, and as someone who loved Roe’s author like a grandfather….

What, exactly, is the problem with Roe? The problem, I believe, is that it has little connection to the Constitutional right it purportedly interpreted. A constitutional right to privacy broad enough to include abortion has no meaningful foundation in constitutional text, history, or precedent ­- at least, it does not if those sources are fairly described and reasonably faithfully followed.”

The Lingering Problems with Roe v. Wade, and Why the Recent Senate Hearings on Michael McConnell’s Nomination Only Underlined Them” FindLaw Legal Commentary, Oct. 3, 2002

Share on Facebook

Author: Sarah

Sarah is a member of the board of The Pro-life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

− one = one