Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Decision by the U.S. Supreme Court

Introduction

In the US Supreme Court, there was a matter in contention regarding abortion. According to the constitution of the United States, no person has been conferred abortion rights. Initially, individuals were free to regulate any aspect of abortion, not deterred by federal laws (Miller & Cross, 2021). The case in this paper involved a state law in Mississippi that barred abortion actions after the first fifteen weeks of gestation. After careful consideration and submissions in a court of law, most judges decided that abortion is not a constitutional right and that no individual is given authority to regulate access to the matter.

Summary of the Facts, Issues, Rule of Law, and Analysis

The issue presented in the court related to the question of whether all pre-viability bans on elective abortions are illegal. The subject had risen following a case that involved Thomas E. Dobbs and Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the only abortion clinic in Mississippi. The clinic had sued Dobbs, a state health officer because the law had banned abortion operations that ensued beyond fifteen weeks after conceiving (Adynski et al., 2022). The injunctions had been based on the previous court’s order that prevented states from banning abortions before twenty-four weeks because the constitution protects women’s choice for abortion (Adynski et al., 2022). There seemed to be an ideological difference that saw a shift in the opinion under the Due Process Clause of the 14^th Amendment to the US Constitution. Thus, the rule of law had provided through an affirmed constitutional provision that it was right to have an abortion at an individual’s discretion. That ruling was made during Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) (Adynski et al., 2022). Therefore, the issue posed a constitutional challenge that made the Supreme Court overrule the matter.

The court analysed the matter through oral submissions that were held before judges of the supreme court. The petition filed stated that a fetus can detect pain and respond to it within the first two trimesters in the gestational period. Additionally, the analysis mentioned that protecting potential human life was paramount (Ponce et al., 2022). The Supreme Court, through Justice Alito, said that the Constitution had not made reference to abortion, and there was no liberty implicitly protected by the Constitution as far as abortion is concerned. Thus, despite the Due Process Clause assuring abortion rights that are not stated in the constitution, that right must be intensely embedded in the history of the US and customs. In conclusion, the court decided that outlawing abortion later than 15 weeks by Mississippi law was legitimate and reversed the right to abortion as provided by Joe v. Wade in 1973 (Miller & Cross, 2021). As a result, abortion is illegal in the US because all the previous rulings proposing the same were made unconstitutional.

Conclusion

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case involved a ruling on whether or barred individuals from deciding on the abortion process after fifteen weeks of pregnancy. At the end of the legal proceedings, the court analyzed and concluded that no person is conferred the right to abortion, thus, overruling the previous decisions that had given a contrary verdict. Whether the court was right or wrong, it is important to consider the matter’s moral, health, and religious aspects. Therefore, due to the controversy, my opinion is that the US Supreme Court was right to ban abortion in the US. The reason is that abolishing the act coincides with the country’s moral, religious and medical traditions that have been there since time immemorial.

References

Adynski, G., Bravo, L., Harris, M., Adynski, H., Zaragoza, S., & Ikharo, E. et al. (2022). Global implications of Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization for nurses as a historically gendered profession. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 135(5), 10-42.

Miller, R., & Cross, F. (2021). Legal environment today: The constitution of the United States (10^th ed.). Cengage.

Ponce, S., Bajaj, A., Baniel, C., Seldon, C., Sim, A., & Franco, I. et al. (2022). Protecting our patients and trainees: The complex consequences of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Ruling. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2(5), 33-35.