Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Short note on Eugenics
Although there is no specific protection of privacy in the Constitution, many people believe that the ninth amendment, which reads, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” is meant to protect the privacy of the home (Beeman 70). In his Griswold concurrence, Justice Goldberg stated:
The fact that no particular provision of the Constitution explicitly forbids the State from disrupting the traditional relation of the family – a relation as old and as fundamental as our entire civilization – surely does not show that the Government was meant to have the power to do so. Rather, as the Ninth Amendment expressly recognizes, there are fundamental personal rights such as this one, which are protected from abridgement by the Government though not specifically mentioned in the Constitution (Linder).
The privacy of family affairs, such as a pregnancy, are in fact protected by the ninth amendment of the Constitution; therefore, abortion regulations, which attempt to interfere in the private lives of pregnant mothers and their doctors, are clearly unconstitutional.
…show more content…
The amendment states that no search or seizure can be conducted unless there is a “probable cause,” yet on March 29, 2011 Arizona legislature criminalized abortion based on the sex or race of the fetus (DeFrancesco). There is no legitimate way of determining whether or not the decision to abort was based on race or sex; therefore, to accuse a woman of such an offense would be criminalizing her without “probable cause.” Not only is this regulation just another way to hinder the process of abortion, it also violates the fourth
Instead, the court recognized that the right to abortion was guaranteed under personal privacy. Thus, any law regulating abortion in any state across the United States was supposed to be justified by stating any of the compelling state interests. Additionally, any legislative enactment set forth should be tailored in meeting the compelling interests of all parties. The judges also agreed that the right to abortion was unlimited; therefore, it was important for the court to determine a framework that would balance the right to abortion and those of the government (Stewart et al. 307). The latter sought to protect the rights of all mothers and at the same time protect the human life. If the abortion law was completely unregulated, then there would be cases where individuals would practice abortion without factoring the important role of government in conserving life (Saad). As a result, the trimester framework that took the above issues into consideration was conceived. The framework established when the fundamental rights of women to issues relating abortion became absolute. It also established when the state's interests were more compelling than the rights of the woman. In the first trimester, the Court left the decision to the woman and the physicians. However, after the first trimester or at the end of the first trimester when fetal viability had been established, the state had a right to protect the health of the mother as well as the unborn child (Saad). The state was also required to regulate all abortion procedures so that they became reasonable. The procedures were supposed to protect and preserve maternal health. At the third trimester, the state interest would become compelling since the viability of the fetus becomes compelling. In such cases, the state has the right to regulate abortion to protect human life. Also, the
The Roe vs. Wade decision held that a woman, with her doctor, could choose abortion in earlier months of pregnancy without restriction, and with restrictions in later months, based on the right to privacy. It invalidated all state laws limiting women's access to abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy based on the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights. The Court's decision in this case was that the Ninth Amendment, "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people," protected a person's right to privacy.
" Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbra of the First Amendment. The Third Amendment in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms 'the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures'. The Fifth Amendment in its Self Incrimination Clause.
Tyranny riddles many forms of government, such as oligarchy, absolute monarchy, dictatorship, autocracy, and totalitarianism. In May of 1787, delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia gathered to create a stronger central government -- while avoiding the tyranny that so many other forms of government had allowed for. James Madison, of one those very same delegates, defined tyranny as “The accumulation of all powers...in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many...” in Federalist Paper #47. The key to the protection against tyranny in the American Constitution was the way in which power was divided. The Constitution guarded against tyranny by making provisions for federalism, the separation of powers, checks and balances of power, and fairly equal congressional power.
The ninth and tenth amendments could be exactly what a women is looking for when choosing to have an abortion. While the ninth amendment states “there are other rights that may exist aside from the ones explicitly mentioned, and even though they are not listed, it does not mean they can be violated.” The fourth amendment states the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated. A woman not having the right to have an abortion would be like saying she doesn’t have the right to do what she wants with her body (violation of the 9th amendment) or in other words, her property.
The case that I decided to write about is one of the most controversial cases that have ever happened in the United States. The Roe v. Wade (1973) case decided that a woman with her doctor could choose to have an abortion during the early months of that pregnancy. However, if the woman chose to wait until the later months of the pregnancy then they would have certain restrictions based on their right to privacy. This case invalidated all state laws which limited women’s access to abortions during their first trimester of their pregnancy which was based on the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution. The Amendment states that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” (Cornell University Law School, 2013).
On January 22, 1973, a monumental ordeal for all of the United States had come about, which was that abortion was legalized. It was the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade that made us take a turn on this political issue. In this case, Jane Roe (Norma McCorvey) was an unmarried woman who wasn’t permitted to terminate her unborn child, because the Texas criminal abortion law made it impossible to perform an abortion unless it was putting the mother’s health in danger. Jane Roe was against doing it illegally, so she fought to do it legally. In the court ruling, they acknowledged that the lawful right to have privacy is extensive enough to cover a woman’s decision on whether or not she should be able to terminate her pregnancy.
Overall, the ruling in this case was a perfect interpretation of the Constitution. Despite opposition claiming that it is not addressed in the Constitution, too few rights are ever addressed in the Constitution of the United States. That is why there is a thing called Judicial Review. By utilizing judicial review, the interpreters of the law –Supreme Court, may make changes to policies and laws. Abortion, medicinal marijuana, and marriage fall under the umbrella of Equal Protection since they correspond to the rights and liberties of US citizens.
Unlike many other foundational documents written by other counties, the US Constitution has held strong from the start. The Constitution is at the center of our everyday lives and is the reason we are able to live with the freedom and security that we do. As the Constitutions author, contents, and effect on the US are evaluated it is very clear why America holds so strongly to the foundation the Constitution set in place.
In 1970, Norma McCorvey, a single and pregnant woman in Texas wanted to get an abortion. The state laws of Texas at that time stated that it was illegal to have an abortion in Texas. Even though the state told her that she could go to one of the four states in which abortion was legal to have the procedure done, she decided that she could not afford to travel to another state to receive the procedure. Norma McCorvey decided that she would sue the state of Texas, claiming that her constitutional rights were being taken from her. She then changed her name to the pseudonym “Jane Roe” to protect her right of privacy. The district court found that Roe did have grounds to file the suit against the state of Texas. They ruled on the grounds that the abortion laws in Texas infringed on the first, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth amendments of the constitution. The first amendment states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Amend.html). The fourth amendment states that, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”
Abortion, or premature termination of pregnancy, can be accidental or intentional, and both types can be legal or illegal. If the ongoing pregnancy becomes a medical threat, abortion is not illegal. Legal developments and healthcare services are intertwined. The American Medical Association stated that abortions were wrong and unsafe, which led the National Abortion Federation to make abortion a "physicians-only" practice that could be performed legally to save a woman's life (National Abortion Federation NAF). It wasn't until 1973 that abortions were made legal in the United States due to the "Supreme Court's decision in Roe vs. Wade, ruling that Americans' right to privacy included the right of a woman to decide whether to have children, and the right of a woman and her doctor to make that decision without state interference" (NAF).
Three Works Cited Many people believe abortion is only a moral issue, but it is also a constitutional issue. It is a woman's right to choose what she does with her body, and it should not be altered or influenced by anyone else. This right is guaranteed by the ninth amendment, which contains the right to privacy. The ninth amendment states: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." This right guarantees the right to women, if they so choose, to have an abortion, up to the end of the first trimester.
“The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This is one of the most confusing and most misunderstood amendment there is. The Ninth amendment is the meaning to protect. It means the constitution can not take away any peoples rights that are not named. Anything in this constitution can be used to cancel an amendment. Congress added the Ninth amendment to The Bill of rights to ensure that it would not be used at a later time to deny fundamental rights. The Ninth amendment is still used today that people don’t even notice it’s used directly on abortion, your right to die, and your gay rights.
Many people believe abortion is a moral issue, but it’s also a constitutional issue (Messerli 1). The right of the woman to speak about this issue is hers, and is guaranteed by the ninth amendment, which is the right to privacy. The ninth amendment states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." (Boland 7) This amendment guarantees the right to women, so if they choose to have an abortion, up to the end of their first trimester it is theirs. Regardless of morals, a woman has the right to privacy and a ...
The right to privacy is our right to keep a domain around us, which includes all those things that are apart of us, such as our body, home, property, thoughts, feelings, secrets and identity. The right to privacy gives us the ability to choose which parts in this domain can be accessed by others, and to control the extent, manner and timing of the use of those parts we choose to disclose (Privacy Concerns 1). “Everyone has the right for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right…” (Privacy concerns 2). In 1998, the Human Rights Act, the act sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that individuals have, came into force; it incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8 which protects the right to private and family life. Was the first time there was a generalized right to privacy recognized by law in this country.