Though it is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the concept of a fundamental right to privacy played a key role in the arguments in Roe v. Wade. How did the Supreme Court advance from the right to privacy to the right to abortion? Six law professors explore the legal foundations for Roe v. Wade.
Part Three premieres Wednesday, October 30, 2019.
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.
Prof. Helen M. Alvare, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
Prof. David E. Bernstein, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University
Prof. Robert P. George, Princeton University
Prof. Linda Greenhouse, Yale Law School
Prof. Kimberly Mutcherson, Rutgers Law School
Prof. Teresa Stanton Collett, University of St. Thomas School of Law
* * * * *
Related Links & Differing Views:
Constitution Daily: “On this day, the Roe v. Wade Decision”
C-SPAN: “Landmark Cases: Roe v. Wade”
The Federalist Society Blog: “‘Uncommonly Silly’—and Correctly Decided: The Right and Wrong of Griswold v. Connecticut and Why It Matters Today”
National Review: “Death by Privacy”
Willamette Law Review: “In Defense of Griswold v. Connecticut: Privacy, Originalism, and the Iceberg Theory of Omission”
UC Davis Law Review: “The So-Called Right to Privacy”
Notre Dame Law Review: “Griswold v. Connecticut: The Justices and Connecticut’s Uncommonly Silly Law”
Arcane Knowledge: “Legal Issues of Roe v. Wade”