--- title: "Roe v. Wade" description: "The right of privacy — grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause (or alternatively the Ninth Amendment) — encompasses a woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy. State regulation becomes progressively more permissible as pregnancy advances. Under the 'trimester…" type: "case" court: "U.S. Supreme Court" decided: "1973-01-22" citation: "410 U.S. 113 (1973)" docket: "70-18" status: "Overruled by Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization" source_url: "https://www.abhortion.org/cases/roe-v-wade-1973.html" --- # Roe v. Wade _Full caption: Jane Roe, et al. v. Henry Wade, District Attorney of Dallas County_ **Citation:** 410 U.S. 113 (1973) · **Docket No.** 70-18 **Status:** Overruled by Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization | Field | Value | | --- | --- | | Court | U.S. Supreme Court | | Argued | December 13, 1971 | | Decided | January 22, 1973 | | Vote | 7-2 | | Majority author | Blackmun, J. | | Joined by | Burger, C.J.; Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Powell, JJ. | ## Question presented Whether the constitutional right of privacy encompasses a woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy, and whether states may criminalize abortion. ## Holding The right of privacy — grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause (or alternatively the Ninth Amendment) — encompasses a woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy. State regulation becomes progressively more permissible as pregnancy advances. Under the 'trimester framework': first trimester — state may not regulate abortion; second trimester — state may regulate to protect maternal health; after viability — state may prohibit abortion except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother. The word 'person' in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn. ## Reasoning Justice Blackmun's opinion (a) reviewed extensive history purporting to show abortion was widely tolerated in ancient and common-law times; (b) grounded a right of privacy in the Fourteenth Amendment; (c) held the right encompasses abortion; (d) balanced this right against state interests in maternal health (compelling after first trimester) and potential life (compelling after viability); (e) explicitly refused to decide 'when life begins'; (f) held the unborn are not 'persons' under the Fourteenth Amendment. The historical analysis has been substantially discredited by later scholarship (Dellapenna 2006; Keown 1988; adopted by Dobbs 2022). ## Opinions ### Majority — Blackmun, J. _Joined by Burger, C.J.; Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Powell, JJ._ The right of privacy — grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause (or alternatively the Ninth Amendment) — encompasses a woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy. State regulation becomes progressively more permissible as pregnancy advances. Under the 'trimester framework': first trimester — state may not regulate abortion; second trimester — state may regulate to protect maternal health; after viability — state may prohibit abortion except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother. The word 'person' in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn. ### Concurrence — Burger, C.J. _Not joined by any other justice_ Emphasized the Court was not endorsing abortion on demand. ### Concurrence — Douglas, J. _Not joined by any other justice_ Located the right in a broader theory of personal liberty. ### Concurrence — Stewart, J. _Not joined by any other justice_ Grounded the right in substantive due process. ### Dissent — White, J. _Joined by Rehnquist, J._ Called Roe 'an exercise of raw judicial power.' ### Dissent — Rehnquist, J. _Not joined by any other justice_ Extensive historical analysis showing 36 state anti-abortion laws existed at the time of the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification (1868). ## Key quotes > "We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified and must be considered against important state interests in regulation." > — Blackmun, J. (majority) · 410 U.S. at 154 > "The word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn." > — Blackmun, J. (majority) · 410 U.S. at 158 > "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer." > — Blackmun, J. (majority) · 410 U.S. at 159 > "I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court." > — White, J. (dissenting) · 410 U.S. at 221-222 > "By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion... The only conclusion possible from this history is that the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the power to legislate with respect to this matter." > — Rehnquist, J. (dissenting) · 410 U.S. at 174-177 ## Practical effect All 50 states' abortion laws immediately unconstitutional to the extent they went beyond the trimester framework. Estimated ~63.5 million abortions in the U.S. from 1973-2021 (NRLC). Created 49 years of federal constitutional protection for abortion, until overruled by Dobbs (2022). ## Perspectives The summaries below are descriptive, not evaluative — an attempt to represent fairly how each camp typically frames this case. ### Abolitionist framing Roe is the central negative touchstone for abolitionists. Explicitly and constantly compared to Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) — both denied constitutional personhood to a class of human beings. Abolitionist rhetoric ('immediatism' vs. 'incrementalism') consciously mirrors the antebellum debate. Key critique: Roe's Section VI historical analysis relied on the discredited Cyril Means articles; Joseph Dellapenna's 'Dispelling the Myths of Abortion History' (2006) systematically refuted Means's claims. ### Mainstream pro-life framing For 49 years, the central pro-life target. Motivated the entire modern pro-life movement. Compared to Dred Scott (Reagan, 'Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation,' 1983). ### Pro-choice framing For 49 years, treated as sacrosanct and 'settled' precedent. Advocates argued it protected essential women's freedom. ## Significance Most consequential Supreme Court decision on abortion. Even after Dobbs, Roe remains the central historical and rhetorical reference point. | Measure | Score | | --- | --- | | Overall significance | 10 / 10 | | Legal precedential weight | 10 | | Practical impact on access | 10 | | Movement relevance (abolitionist) | 10 | | Enduring relevance, 2026 | 8 | ## Sources ### Primary sources - [supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/) - [law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113) - [chanrobles.com/usa/us_supremecourt/410/113/index.php](https://chanrobles.com/usa/us_supremecourt/410/113/index.php) ### Secondary sources - [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade) - [britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade](https://www.britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade) ## Related cases **Cites earlier cases:** - [Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)](griswold-v-connecticut-1965.md) - [United States v. Vuitch (1971)](united-states-v-vuitch-1971.md) - [Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)](eisenstadt-v-baird-1972.md) **Cited by later cases:** - [Doe v. Bolton (1973)](doe-v-bolton-1973.md) - [Harris v. McRae (1980)](harris-v-mcrae-1980.md) - Akron v. Akron Center (1983) - Thornburgh v. ACOG (1986) - [Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)](webster-v-reproductive-health-services-1989.md) - [Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)](planned-parenthood-v-casey-1992.md) - [Stenberg v. Carhart (2000)](stenberg-v-carhart-2000.md) - [Gonzales v. Carhart (2007)](gonzales-v-carhart-2007.md) - [Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016)](whole-womans-health-v-hellerstedt-2016.md) - [June Medical Services v. Russo (2020)](june-medical-services-v-russo-2020.md) - [Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)](dobbs-v-jackson-2022.md) ## Notes Norma McCorvey ('Jane Roe') gave birth before the case was decided; the baby was adopted. McCorvey later became a pro-life activist. Justice Blackmun's historical analysis (Section VI) relied heavily on Cyril Means, Jr.'s 1968 and 1971 articles; Means was general counsel of NARAL when he wrote them. Subsequent scholarship (Dellapenna 2006, Keown 1988, Mohr 1978) has substantially undermined the Means narrative; Dobbs adopted the critique.