The evolution of a constitutional right to an abortion. Fashioned in the 1970s and secured in the 1980s.

Abstract

Tracing the historical evolution of the right to abortion the discussion devotes particular attention to the various standards of judicial review that have been used by the Supreme Court and lower courts in abortion cases. The constitutionality of specific types of abortion regulation is reviewed and the supreme Courts most recent abortion decisions--City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health Inc. Planned Parenthood Association v. Ashcroft and Simopoulos v. Virginia -- are analyzed. In these recent cases the Court resolves the confusion surrounding appropriate standards for judicial review of abortion regulations and guides legislators regarding the kinds of regulations that are constitutionally sufficient. A womans fundamental constitutional right to abortion was first recognized in 1973 in the Roe v. Wade case and is thus a relatively new constitutional right. In Doe v. Bolton a companion case to Roe v. Wade the Court determined the constitutionality of various provisions of a more modern Georgia statute. The decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton did not end the controversy surrounding abortion. Legislative attempts to thwart the abortion right were cut short by courts that were unified in their application of the strict scrutiny standard of review of abortion legislation. In the Maher Poelker and Harris cases the court upheld measures that limited the ability of a woman to secure an abortion for reasons that were misconstrued by the lower courts. Consequently confusion ensued in this area during the late 1970s and early 1980s. The City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health Inc. eliminated the cause of confusion. The Court rejected application of the unduly burdensome standard of review of abortion regulations and reaffirmed its Roe v. Wade holding that heightened scrutiny was required. The City of Akron showed that the Court was unwilling to further retreat from its earliest decisions. The Court offered no indication that it had 2nd thoughts about its Maher Poelker and Harris decisions. The Court continued to perceive the right of minors to an abortion differently from that of adult women. In Ashcroft the Court upheld a parental or judicial consent statute that could work as an absolute veto of the right of abortion for some minor females.