Supreme Court Asked to Overturn Roe v. Wade
The woman formally known as “Jane Roe,” whose case first legalized abortion in the United States 32 years ago, asked the Supreme Court to overturn its decision, or at least re-evaluate its ruling, on Wednesday, January 19, 2005.
The woman formally known as “Jane Roe,” whose case first legalized abortion in the United States 32 years ago, asked the Supreme Court to overturn its decision, or at least re-evaluate its ruling, on Wednesday, January 19, 2005.
Norma McCorvey, whose protest of Texas’ ban on abortion led to the 1973 ruling in the landmark Roe v. Wade case, said the case should be heard again, in light of the overwhelming evidence that the procedure harms women.
"This is the day I've longed for," said McCorvey, who said she regrets her role in legalizing abortion. "Now we know so much more, and I plead with the Court to listen to the witnesses and re-evaluate Roe v. Wade. It was a dreadful day in America when the Supreme Court allowed a woman to kill her own child."
Get Our Latest News for FREE
"With each child aborted, there is another tragedy: the harm to the mother," McCorvey said. "I've worked in abortion facilities, and I've seen firsthand the horrific nature of abortion and its devastation to women and girls."
Allan Parker, president of The Justice Foundation, and the lead attorney in the case, explained that much have changed since the 1973 ruling.
"We're asking the Court to find, based on the changed legal and factual conditions, that it would be a grave injustice to continue Roe v. Wade," Parker said on Wednesday.
The Justice Foundation filed a petition for writ of certiorari on January 14, 2005, asking the Supreme Court to hear the case; the petition reached the Court today morning.
The petition was first filed in a lower court in Dallas in June 2003. Since then, two lower courts threw out McCorvey’s request. McCorvey then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, during which the Appeals judge Edith H. Jones criticized the abortion ruling in a strongly worded concurrence.
"McCorvey presented evidence that goes to the heart of the balance Roe struck between the choice of a mother and the life of her unborn child. First, there are about a thousand affidavits of women who have had abortions and claim to have suffered long-term emotional damage and impaired relationships from their decision. Studies by scientists, offered by McCorvey, suggest that women may be affected emotionally and physically for years afterward and may be more prone to engage in high-risk, self-destructive conduct as a result of having had abortions," Judge Jones’ concurrence read.
"In sum, if courts were to delve into the facts underlying Roe's balancing scheme with present-day knowledge, they might conclude that the woman's choice is far more risky and less beneficial, and the child's sentience far more advanced, than the Roe Court knew,” Judge Jones stated.
Jones also added that she “fervently hoped that the Court would someday acknowledge such developments and re-evaluate" the Roe case accordingly.
Under federal law, the original party may request a ruling be vacated when factual and legal changes make the decision no longer just.
According to Parker, Norma presents substantial evidence that there exist changes in factual and legal conditions since the Roe v. Wade decision was made.
"Norma has presented over 5,300 pages of significant, sufficient, and compelling evidence of substantial changes in factual and legal conditions," Parker said, noting the evidence includes sworn testimony by women who suffered from their abortions as well as testimony from scientific and medical experts and abortion facility workers."
One of the women stated in sworn testimony for the case, Joyce Zounis, explained that abortion’s harmful affects lasts much longer than the time under the abortionists’ knife.
"The aftermath of abortion is horrendous," said Zounis, director of women's outreach for Operation Outcry: Silent No More – a national movement empowering women to speak out about how abortion harmed them. "I was told it would be over 'real quick' – it lasted 27 years!"
Zounis, who had the first of seven abortions beginning at age 15, shared, "not once in eleven years was I told of the emotional complications an abortion can bring -- personality changes, numbness, rage, never-ending mental anguish, the exhaustive effort of balancing my fragile state of mind, the tormenting silence of guilt and shame, the constant dissatisfaction with life and the absolute need to grieve the loss of my children.
"Nightmares and suicidal thoughts are common, especially around the anniversary of the abortion or the date when the baby would have been born," said Caron Strong, who is a witness in the case and has had four abortions. "Everyday sounds or events can act as a trigger."
For more information on The Justice Foundation, visit: www.txjf.org
