410 U.S. 113 (1973), 70-18, Roe v. Wade

Docket NºNo. 70-18
Citation410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147
Party NameRoe v. Wade
Case DateJanuary 22, 1973
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Page 113

410 U.S. 113 (1973)

93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147

Roe

v.

Wade

No. 70-18

United States Supreme Court

Jan. 22, 1973

Argued December 13, 1971

Reargued October 11, 1972

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Syllabus

A pregnant single woman (Roe) brought a class action challenging the constitutionality of the Texas criminal abortion laws, which proscribe procuring or attempting an abortion except on medical advice for the purpose of saving the mother's life. A licensed physician (Hallford), who had two state abortion prosecutions pending against him, was permitted to intervene. A childless married couple (the Does), the wife not being pregnant, separately attacked the laws, basing alleged injury on the future possibilities of contraceptive failure, pregnancy, unpreparedness for parenthood, and impairment of the wife's health. A three-judge District Court, which consolidated the actions, held that Roe and Hallford, and members of their classes, had standing to sue and presented justiciable controversies. Ruling that declaratory, though not injunctive, relief was warranted, the court declared the abortion statutes void as vague and overbroadly infringing those plaintiffs' Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court ruled the Does' complaint not justiciable. Appellants directly appealed to this Court on the injunctive rulings, and appellee cross-appealed from the District Court's grant of declaratory relief to Roe and Hallford.

Held:

1. While 28 U.S.C. § 1253 authorizes no direct appeal to this Court from the grant or denial of declaratory relief alone, review is not foreclosed when the case is properly before the Court on appeal from specific denial of injunctive relief and the arguments as to both injunctive and declaratory relief are necessarily identical. P. 123.

2. Roe has standing to sue; the Does and Hallford do not. Pp. 123-129.

(a) Contrary to appellee's contention, the natural termination of Roe's pregnancy did not moot her suit. Litigation involving pregnancy, which is "capable of repetition, yet evading review," is an exception to the usual federal rule that an actual controversy

Page 114

must exist at review stages, and not simply when the action is initiated. Pp. 124-125.

(b) The District Court correctly refused injunctive, but erred in granting declaratory, relief to Hallford, who alleged no federally protected right not assertable as a defense against the good faith state prosecutions pending against him. Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66. Pp. 125-127.

[93 S.Ct. 708] (c) The Does' complaint, based as it is on contingencies, any one or more of which may not occur, is too speculative to present an actual case or controversy. Pp. 127-129.

3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. Pp. 147-164.

(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician. Pp. 163, 164.

(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health. Pp. 163, 164.

(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. Pp. 163-164; 164-165.

4. The State may define the term "physician" to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined. P. 165.

5. It is unnecessary to decide the injunctive relief issue, since the Texas authorities will doubtless fully recognize the Court's ruling

Page 115

that the Texas criminal abortion statutes are unconstitutional. P. 166.

314 F.Supp. 1217, affirmed in part and reversed in part.

BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, STEWART, MARSHALL, and POWELL, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., post, p. 207, DOUGLAS, J., post, p. 209, and STEWART, J., post, p. 167, filed concurring opinions. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which REHNQUIST, J., joined, post, p. 221. REHNQUIST, J., filed a dissenting opinion, post, p. 171.

Page 116

BLACKMUN, J., lead opinion

MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court.

This Texas federal appeal and its Georgia companion, Doe v. Bolton, post, p. 179, present constitutional challenges to state criminal abortion legislation. The Texas statutes under attack here are typical of those that have been in effect in many States for approximately a century. The Georgia statutes, in contrast, have a modern cast, and are a legislative product that, to an extent at least, obviously reflects the influences of recent attitudinal change, of advancing medical knowledge and techniques, and of new thinking about an old issue.

We forthwith acknowledge our awareness of the sensitive and emotional nature of the abortion controversy, of the vigorous opposing views, even among physicians, and of the deep and seemingly absolute convictions that the subject inspires. One's philosophy, one's experiences, one's exposure to the raw edges of human existence, one's religious training, one's attitudes toward life and family and their values, and the moral standards one establishes and seeks to observe, are all likely to influence and to color one's thinking and conclusions about abortion.

In addition, population growth, pollution, poverty, and racial overtones tend [93 S.Ct. 709] to complicate and not to simplify the problem.

Our task, of course, is to resolve the issue by constitutional measurement, free of emotion and of predilection. We seek earnestly to do this, and, because we do, we

Page 117

have inquired into, and in this opinion place some emphasis upon, medical and medical-legal history and what that history reveals about man's attitudes toward the abortion procedure over the centuries. We bear in mind, too, Mr. Justice Holmes' admonition in his now-vindicated dissent in Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45, 76 (1905):

[The Constitution] is made for people of fundamentally differing views, and the accident of our finding certain opinions natural and familiar or novel and even shocking ought not to conclude our judgment upon the question whether statutes embodying them conflict with the Constitution of the United States.

I

The Texas statutes that concern us here are Arts. 1191-1194 and 1196 of the State's Penal Code.1 These make it a crime to "procure an abortion," as therein

Page 118

defined, or to attempt one, except with respect to "an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother." Similar statutes are in existence in a majority of the States.2

Page 119

[93 S.Ct. 710] Texas first enacted a criminal abortion statute in 1854. Texas Laws 1854, c. 49, § 1, set forth in 3 H. Gammel, Laws of Texas 1502 (1898). This was soon modified into language that has remained substantially unchanged to the present time. See Texas Penal Code of 1857, c. 7, Arts. 531-536; G. Paschal, Laws of Texas, Arts. 2192-2197 (1866); Texas Rev.Stat., c. 8, Arts. 536-541 (1879); Texas Rev.Crim.Stat., Arts. 1071-1076 (1911). The final article in each of these compilations provided the same exception, as does the present Article 1196, for an abortion by "medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother."3

Page 120

II

Jane Roe,4 a single woman who was residing in Dallas County, Texas, instituted this federal action in March 1970 against the District Attorney of the county. She sought a declaratory judgment that the Texas criminal abortion statutes were unconstitutional on their face, and an injunction restraining the defendant from enforcing the statutes.

Roe alleged that she was unmarried and pregnant; that she wished to terminate her pregnancy by an abortion "performed by a competent, licensed physician, under safe, clinical conditions"; that she was unable to get a "legal" abortion in Texas because her life did not appear to be threatened by the continuation of her pregnancy; and that she could not afford to travel to another jurisdiction in order to secure a legal abortion under safe conditions. She claimed that the Texas statutes were unconstitutionally vague and that they abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. By an amendment to her complaint, Roe purported to sue "on behalf of herself and all other women" similarly situated.

James Hubert Hallford, a licensed physician, sought and was granted leave to intervene in Roe's action. In his complaint, he alleged that he had been arrested previously for violations of the Texas abortion statutes, and

Page 121

that two such prosecutions were pending against him. He described conditions of patients who came to him seeking abortions, and he claimed that for many cases he, as a physician, was unable to determine [93 S.Ct. 711] whether they fell within or outside the exception recognized...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5183 practice notes
  • Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 15, 2018
    • November 15, 2018
    ...to contraceptive services or coverage. The Church Amendments were enacted in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). Although the Court in Roe required abortion to be legal in certain circumstances, Roe did not include, within that right, the requiremen......
  • Equal Participation of Faith-Based Organizations in the Federal Agencies' Programs and Activities
    • United States
    • Agency For International Development,Education Department,Justice Department,Labor Department
    • Invalid date
    ...choices as enshrined in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), and Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 The Agencies received comments that the NPRMs would create inconsistencies with numerous major interagency and government-wide initiatives, including F......
  • 11 F.Supp.2d 795 (E.D.Va. 1998), Civ.A. 398CV309, Richmond Medical Center for Women v. Gilmore
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 4th Circuit United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • June 25, 1998
    ...what they consider to be safe medical judgment in the treatment of their patients and for performing abortions which, under Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973) and Casey they are permitted to perform. Second, harm would befall their patients because the specter of......
  • 18 F.3d 526 (8th Cir. 1994), 93-1579, Fargo Women's Health Organization v. Schafer
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • February 10, 1994
    ...a factual analysis. The Casey opinion, authored by Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, reaffirmed the validity of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), and adopted the undue burden standard for reconciling the state's interest with the woman's constitutionally-......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3949 cases
  • 11 F.Supp.2d 795 (E.D.Va. 1998), Civ.A. 398CV309, Richmond Medical Center for Women v. Gilmore
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 4th Circuit Eastern District of Virginia
    • June 25, 1998
    ...what they consider to be safe medical judgment in the treatment of their patients and for performing abortions which, under Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973) and Casey they are permitted to perform. Second, harm would befall their patients because the specter of......
  • 18 F.3d 526 (8th Cir. 1994), 93-1579, Fargo Women's Health Organization v. Schafer
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
    • February 10, 1994
    ...a factual analysis. The Casey opinion, authored by Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, reaffirmed the validity of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), and adopted the undue burden standard for reconciling the state's interest with the woman's constitutionally-......
  • 192 B.R. 1 (D.Mass. 1996), 94-14970, In re Goldman
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 1st Circuit District of Massachusetts
    • January 18, 1996
    ...the long-standing exception to the mootness doctrine where an issue is "capable of repetition, yet evading review." Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 125, 93 S.Ct. 705, 713, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973); Southern Pac. Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. Page 5 498, 515, 31 S.Ct. 279, 283, 55 L.Ed. 31......
  • 193 F.R.D. 175 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), 99 CIV 11693 WHP, Hirschfeld v. Stone
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Southern District of New York
    • May 9, 2000
    ...in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty, see Whalen, 429 U.S. at 599 n. 23, 97 S.Ct. at 876 n. 23 (citing Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 152, 93 S.Ct. 705, 726-27, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973)), and encompasses the " individual interest in avoiding disclosure of personal matters......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 firm's commentaries
  • Taken by the Fifth: The Fifth Amendment 'Taking Clause' and Intellectual Property
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • March 4, 2004
    ...of contraceptives violates the right of marital privacy which is within penumbra of rights encompassed within the Bill of Rights). [103] 410 U.S. 113 (1973)( Finding that certain State criminal abortion laws violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects the &qu......
  • Petition For Writ of Certiorari
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • March 20, 2014
    ...with portrayal of former president, as well as advertiser backlash resulting from NBC’s attempt to air a movie about Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)). Furthermore, “[i]f non-commercial educational 180a stations were permitted to air paid advertisements from for-profit entities,” their othe......
  • Data Privacy in a Time of Reaction: "Big Data" versus "The People"
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • February 21, 2017
    ...of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, 268 U.S. 510 (1925), Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). iv See Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to......
  • The IADC Amicus Brief Program: Its Increasing Success and Influence
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • February 13, 2014
    ...Cases, California Courts: The Judicial Branch of California (Sept. 27, 2013, 3:11 PM), available at http://www.courts.ca.gov/2964.htm. 10 410 U.S. 113, 148–152 (1973). 11 410 U.S. 179, 195 (1973). 12 539 U.S. 306 (2003). 13 See Dan Schweitzer, Fundamentals of Preparing a United States Supre......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1059 books & journal articles
  • Addendum.
    • United States
    • Issues in Law & Medicine Vol. 25 Nbr. 3, March 2010
    • March 22, 2010
    ...of the Phrase "Potential Life" and Its Synonyms: Roe through Casey "Potential life" Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 150, 154, 156, 163 (1973); Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 , 197 (1973); id. at 221 (White, J. dissenting); Beal v. Doe, 432 U.S. 438 , 457, 461 (1977) (Marshall, J., dissenting); Co......
  • Controlling conduct: the emerging protection of sodomy in the military.
    • United States
    • Albany Law Review Vol. 69 Nbr. 4, September 2006
    • September 22, 2006
    ...(holding that a person has a Fourteenth Amendment "liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment"); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 154 (1973) (finding that "the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision"); Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 485 (......
  • The fate of childhood: legal models of children and the parent-child relationship.
    • United States
    • Albany Law Review Vol. 61 Nbr. 2, December 1997
    • December 22, 1997
    ...unconstitutional a New York statute forbidding nonpharmaceutical sale of contraceptives to minors whether married or not); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164-65 (1973) (granting women limited right to abortion); Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438, 443 (1972) (holding unconstitutional a Massachus......
  • The problem with pretext.
    • United States
    • Fordham Urban Law Journal Vol. 38 Nbr. 4, May 2011
    • May 1, 2011
    ...(1995) ("[A]ll racial classifications reviewable under the Equal Protection Clause must be strictly scrutinized."); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 152-57 (1973) (recognizing that the right of privacy is a fundamental right and thus laws attempting to limit that right must be narrowly ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 provisions
  • Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 15, 2018
    • November 15, 2018
    ...to contraceptive services or coverage. The Church Amendments were enacted in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). Although the Court in Roe required abortion to be legal in certain circumstances, Roe did not include, within that right, the requiremen......
  • Equal Participation of Faith-Based Organizations in the Federal Agencies' Programs and Activities
    • United States
    • Agency For International Development,Education Department,Justice Department,Labor Department
    • Invalid date
    ...choices as enshrined in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), and Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 The Agencies received comments that the NPRMs would create inconsistencies with numerous major interagency and government-wide initiatives, including F......
  • Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services,
    • United States
    • Federal Register October 02, 2002
    • August 4, 2002
    ...commenters said that most States allow recovery in one form or another for prenatal injuries. Thus, several commenters cited Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 161-2 (1973) and an article by Paul Benjamin Linton, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 13 St. Louis U. Public Law Rev. 15, 46-64 (1993). Another......