"In Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113, the Court held that a woman's right to decide whether to abort a pregnancy is entitled to constitutional protection. That decision, which is now part of our law, answers the question discussed in Part IV-E of the Court's opinion, but merely poses the question decided in Part IV-D. If two abortion procedures had been equally accessible to Missouri women, in my judgment, the United States Constitution would not prevent the state legislature from outlawing the one it found to be less safe even though its conclusion might not reflect a unanimous consensus of informed medical opinion. However, the record indicates that, when the Missouri statute was enacted, a prohibition of the saline amniocentesis procedure was almost tantamount to a prohibition of any abortion in the State after the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Such a prohibition is inconsistent with the essential holding of Roe v. Wade, and therefore cannot stand. In my opinion, however, the parental consent requirement is consistent with the holding in Roe. The State's interest in the welfare of its young citizens justifies a variety of protective measures. Because he may not foresee the consequences of his decision, a minor may not make an enforceable bargain. He may not lawfully work or travel where he pleases, or even attend exhibitions of constitutionally protected adult motion pictures. Persons below a certain age may not marry without parental consent. Indeed, such consent is essential even when the young woman is already pregnant. The State's interest in protecting a young person from harm justifies the imposition of restraints on his or her freedom even though comparable restraints on adults would be constitutionally impermissible. Therefore, the holding in Roe v. Wade that the abortion decision is entitled to constitutional protection merely emphasizes the importance of the decision; it does not lead to the conclusion that the state legislature has no power to enact legislation for the purpose of protecting a young pregnant woman from the consequences of an incorrect decision."
Quote Details
Added by wikiquote-import-bot
Unverified quote
0 likes
Original Language: English
Available Languages (1)
Sources
MR. JUSTICE WHITE, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST join, concurring in part and dissenting in part, pp.101-102
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade
Revision History
No revisions have been submitted for this quote.
Categories
Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the
1424 quotes on TrueQuotesView all quotes by Roe v. Wade →
Related Quotes
"Harry Blackmun questioned Weddington again on the issue of fetal personhood, as did Potter Stewart. They wanted her t…"
"In 1938, seven Justices heard a constitutional challenge to a federal ban on shipping adulterated milk in interstate …"
"The Court has simultaneously transformed judicially created rights like the right to abortion into preferred constitu…"
"Beyond these paltry authorities, the Court adds only the argument that we should not “encourage a kitchen-sink approa…"
"JUSTICE BREYER, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting. The procedural posture of this case l…"
"JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE BREYER and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting. The Court’s order is stunning. Presen…"
"By the time that Michael Taylor sent out his communiqué, pro-life lawyers had been preparing legal arguments in Roe a…"
"Lawyers for the states of both Georgia and Texas argued that abortion restrictions were appropriate because the state…"
"Pro-life lawyers had complained before about the poor quality of state attorney’s attempts to defend restrictive abor…"
"Ellen McCormack’s Long Island-based organization, Women for the Unborn, which now had 2,000 members, submitted a brie…"