[Book Review of] Abortion and the Constitution: Reversing "Roe v. Wade" Through the Courts, edited by Dennis J. Horan, Edward R. Grant, and Paige C. Cunningham
Year: 1989
Type: book-review
Abstract: For a decade and a half, Americans United for Life has gathered together the best legal, ethical, theological and medical minds of the pro-life movement to combat abortion , infanticide and mercy killing.In my opinion, this book represents AUL's highest accomplishment.Uniformly, the articles in this work are superb, well-researched, canifully conceived and to the point.This book will become a classic of pro-life literature as it presents so me of the sharpest criticism of that dreadful decision, and anyone concerned with the reversal of Roe v. Wade must read this book.Abortion and the Constitution is a compilation of essays written by presenters at an AUL Conference, "Reversing R oe v. Wade through the Courts" on March 31 , 1984, and in it, the decision itself is minutely analyzed, its historical research criticized, its legal arguments scrutinized and its legal conclusions subjected to scathing criticism.In doing this, Abortion and the Constitution presents the finest critique of this decision yet made.Michael Pearce Pfeifer traces the history of Supreme Court reversals , and he notes that the court has regularly and frequently reversed its previous decisions.The average time of reversal is 24 years, but in some instances it has only taken a matter of months for the court to reverse itself.Richard Myers compares the civil liberties case of Brown v. Board of Education and Roe and he notes that the meticulous research, prudent timing and unswerving commitment of Thurgood Marshall to the cause of promoting Black civil rights won the day for them.What is critical in bringing about reversals is presenting such overwhelming evidence that the court can draw no other conclusion but that the previous decision should be reversed.He urges pro-life litiga nts to follow Marshall's tradition, not overreact to the situation, and to avoid some of the indiscretions of the past.Myers argues that the best strategy is to stress that limiting and restricting abortion is in the state's interest, and he feels that other plans would not be as fruitful.He properly warns for the need for caution and deep awareness of the many cross currents that confront the court in decisions such as Roe.Dennis Horan and Burke Balch argue in "Roe v. Wade: No Justification in History, Law or Logic", that major legal and social trends of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries were reversed by the decision.In a scathing criticism of the decision, they note the feeble foundations in history and law of the decision.And in a minute critique of the decision, they show the inferior scholarship of the Roe court.John East and Steven Valentine argue in "Reconciling Santa Clara and Roe v. Wade: A Route to Supreme Court Recognition of Unborn Children as Constitutional Persons", that the weakest aspect of Roe was its declaration of the nonpersonhood of the unborn.In Santa Clara the court held corporations to be legal persons, and yet it denies that the living, breathing and growing unborn child was not a person.Like other authors, they cited Robert Destro's famous article: "Abortion and the Constitution:The Need for a Life-Protective Amendment", to bolster their claims.What is regrettable is that Professor Destro was not a presenter at the symposium.His article had a major impact on the pro-life movement when it was published 10 years ago, and his reflections on the issues years later would have been most enlightening and helpful.
Author: Barry, Robert
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W7139772081