When Abortion Became Legal | Roe v. Wade
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 фев 2017
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/3p8nV64 or visit www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html.
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
In the first episode of Supreme Court Briefs, Mr. Beat explains one of the most controversial cases in American history- Roe v. Wade.
A young woman named Norma McCorvey was single, pregnant, and scared about her future. She wanted an abortion. But in Texas, abortions were illegal, except in cases in which the mother’s life was in danger. McCorvey had planned on having one anyway, at an illegal clinic. However, police shut down that clinic. Desperate, Norma soon found out that two lawyers were looking for women who were seeking abortions in order to fight the Texas law that banned them.
The lawyers, Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, decided to take Norma’s case over several others. The two were not much older than Norma. On March 3, 1970, Coffee officially filed a complaint at the Dallas federal district courthouse, giving Norma a pseudonym, “Jane Roe,” to protect her identity. They were suing the State of Texas, arguing its abortion law was unconstitutional. Defending the state of Texas was Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas. By this time, Norma was six months’ pregnant.
The District Court looked at Norma’s case along with two other related cases. On June 17, 1970, the three-judge panel of the Court unanimously called the Texas abortion law unconstitutional, saying it broke the right to privacy assumed under the Ninth Amendment. However, they did not act to stop enforcement of the law. The defense appealed the ruling, and it went to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Norma had given birth to the baby she had originally thought about killing, and put the baby up for adoption.
The case sat for a year and a half. Finally, on December 13, 1971, the Supreme Court heard arguments.
In his opening argument, defense attorney Jay Floyd made a bad joke that probably hurt his case. Go against Weddington and Coffee, he said, “It’s an old joke, but when a man argues against two beautiful ladies like this, they are going to have the last word.” The joke was not well received. The entire courtroom was silent, and Chief Justice Warren Burger gave him a cold glare. Regardless, by the end of arguments, all of the justices agreed the Texas law was bad, but for different reasons.
But the case sat some more, because two justices, Hugo Black and John Harlan, had recently retired and were not yet replaced. In January, Lewis F. Powell and William Rehnquist joined the court, but it wasn’t until October of 1972 that they heard arguments again.
The Court announced their decision on January 22, 1973. With a 7-2 majority vote, they went in favor of Roe, arguing that abortion fell under the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Again, it came down to a right to privacy. Basically, the Court ruled a woman had the right to an abortion until the fetus reached an age of “viability.” Viability means that the baby would be able to survive independently, outside of the mother’s womb. Well back then, doctors believed this to be around the 28th week of pregnancy. Today, thanks to the wonders of technology, that’s around the 22nd week of pregnancy.
The two justices who disagreed with the decision were Byron White and William Rehnquist, one of the new dudes on the Court. White argued the Court was just making up a new constitutional right and didn’t have the authority to do so. Rehnquist argued the other justices were expanding the 14th Amendment to mean something much more than its original authors intended.
Regardless, the decision essentially legalized abortion and declared many state laws unconstitutional because of this. Before the Roe v. Wade decision, 30 states had outlawed abortion, and the other states restricted it in at least some way.
Roe v. Wade sparked a contentious debate that continues to this day. On one side, supporters of the Roe v. Wade decision are often called “pro-choice,” meaning it should be the woman’s choice whether she wants the abortion or not. Opponents of the Roe v. Wade decision are often called “pro-life.” They argue that, because life begins at conception, any abortion should be regarded as murder.
The abortion issue has become even more divisive in recent years. In fact, many people vote for politicians simply based on whether they are pro-life or not.
So whatever happened to Norma McCorvey? Well, in a 1984 TV interview, she revealed herself as “Roe,” and became a pro-choice advocate, even volunteering at a women’s clinic. At first, she went around telling the press that she had wanted the abortion because she was raped. However, she later said that this was a lie- she had made it up. Norma published an autobiography in 1994, called I Am Roe. Soon after this, in a surprising turn of events, she quit her job at the abortion clinic and became pro-life.
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
You're 6 years late bud
You need a SEQUEL now. Lol. :D :D
Mr. Beat I love your videos and find them informative and interesting surrounding history, politics, your opinion and thoughts on certain things. I do wonder if your beliefs on this issue as changed or what yours are because from this video and one that I recall surrounding a livestream when roe v wade was overturned it seems you have a fairly robust unchanged opinion on it. In this video I noticed some of the way you phrased things being very biased and telling of your own beliefs. "Norman had given birth to the baby she had previously thought about killing" screams of bias on this issue. I'm not dissing you for these beliefs, but more am curious to your perspective as it seems like the reason/your opinions on this are held a little closer to yourself than other issues surrounding free trade, taxes, unions, regulation, environment etc. Maybe I am wrong but if there was a video that cleared that up, I am curious to see it. Keep up the great work at educating people around the US.
Wait, but if Norma McCorvey's case was a lie, how can the ruling still be upheld? She must have been a pro-lifer trying to derail everything, right?
Coming back to this video the day this case got overturned. Still cannot believe that it actually just happened. We’re witnessing history.
Casey also got overturned. The left is mad
@Awesome Cat Prepare to pay in taxes for the financial aid that will be needed
@Awesome Cat bro “systematic infanticide” tf you on about
@Awesome Cat but we would have to pay for the financial aid of millions of non-aborted children
@Awesome Cat you’ll still have to pay a lot more in taxes for their financial aid
Damn, it's kinda odd that Roe died the day before this video was uploaded
I couldn't believe it. I read the news just as I was putting the finishing touches on this video.
You jinxed her! Better stick to really old decisions just in case....
What did she know about Hillary Clinton?
You time traveled. Roe was overturned on May 2022
For anyone confused, Roe literally died several years ago, and metaphorically died more recently.
I can't believe no one has yet to comment about the underwear.
need superman underoos
Mr. Beat can you do Island Trees Vs. Pico?
Well since it is about the scotus it is about a court full of S*^t and so is underwear of babies j/s
Tennessee V. Garner
You want comments? I like the pun, but the execution is more than lazy... horrible, inept drawing... at least copy paste something from a underoo catalogue :-p
Loved the manner you presented this controversial subject. Just the chronological facts, with no bias I could see. Great job!
Thanks so much! That means a lot. :)
It's not controversial....it's simple....abortion is murder.
@@timthunell2685 Well, that's just the issue...I believe its a right...
That's why its controversial.
@@kyokyodisaster4842 You are objectively wrong. A right us a positively granted and protected gift from God. It is impossible that God would provide that status to murdering babies. Abortion is murder. PERIOD. CLOSE THE BOOK.
@@timthunell2685 I respect your belief, but not everybody has the same belief about abortion as you do, and you couldn't force everybody to have the same belief on abortion as you do. Also, not everybody believes in God or the Bible, and you can't force them to do so. End of story.
“Norma McCorvey is fighting against abortion to this day” this absolutely did not age well lol
Ikr
Well... it’s actually only off by one day
She died.
Welp
I'm curious what McCorveys child thinks about Roe vs Wade being overturned
May have to update this video now that we found out “Jane Roe” was paid to change her stance at the latter end of her life...
Holy crap
And why do you say she was paid?
@@jasminecortinas0610 she was paid off by pro-life organizations to say she was pro-life when she wasn’t
Ok that’s wack but also like who cares what effectively a random person thinks about abortion
@@reedplaysgames when their life changed the law of usa, yeah it's kinda of a big deal...
I was aware of this case but the full story is wild
You might want to update this video now that Roe v Wade has been officially overturned.
Mr Beat should do a Supreme Court Brief on Dobbs v Jackson
The evil Supreme Court should have not overturned it.
No bias, not bashing whatever side you disagree with, just a brief telling about what went down to make this happen.
I respect you for this my guy!
There's some bias by Mr. Beat when he says "Meanwhile, Norman had given birth to the BABY she originally THOUGHT ABOUT KILLING". Sounds like he's pro-life.
The dissenting opinions from the 2 justices still makes more sense. The interpretation of the right to pribacy, was WAY to broad. Also, the decision makes no mention of what constitutes "life", other than a delusional standard of "viability". Why should medical intervention decide "viability"? If someone creates an artificial womb where you can put an baby / fetus / embryo / zygote inside in the first week of pregnancy and then have it grow for 9 months, does that make "viability" 1 week? Lol. A shiftting standard, based on medical technology is illogical for implementation, and also completely ignores any and all biological realities. For example, to remain neutral, we shal call it a "hypothertical example", in this example, imagine that the fetus / baby is it's own distinct organism. Then imagine, that the fetus / baby had it's OWN right to privacy. Would abortion not be a violation of such a right to privacy? Let alone the "right to life".
Imagine claiming that someone does NOT have a "right to life", because you do NOT consider them to be ALIVE; Or if you considered them to be LESS than FULLY human? I wonder if any societies ever did that? Wait a second... There was at least 1 society i know of. It wasa a major player during WW2 take a guess which one.
Well, most people believe at least 1 or 2 things that someone and/or something else ALSO believed in the past. So it is not a great comparison. However, it does not change the fact, that the ruling completely ignores biology, and never even distinguishes between what constitutes life. Which would presumably be important, since it can be PROVEN, that a fetus / baby will be born; Therefore, unless one wants to also classify newborn babies as NOT being alive, and therefore worthy of abortions; One must demonstrate, a siginificant developmental difference, that distinguishes between them; And viability is NOT a good distinguisher.
Also, viability = ability to lfie outside the womb. That, therefore, denotes, that the fetus / baby IS, IN FACT, ALIVE, INSIDE THE WOMB. Otherwise, WHY would it matterif it could LIVE outside the womb? Whoich, if we want to ADD medical intervention? Then why NOT parental intervention? A child that is 5 years old CANNOT feed itself, and will starve to death unless taken care of, Therefore, a 5 year old hcild is NOT viable OUTSIDE THE WOMB!!!!!!!!!! Does no one see the logic? Why should medical intervention be considered, and then subsequently discard any other types of intervention when assessing the decision? :D :D
@kieranrollinson8750 I don't know anyone who says a fetus is not alive. Unless they failed biology it is obvious. I think most pro choicers either use viability outside to womb or consciousness. Well actually this may not be most because I see all kinds of thoughts. Viability is generally no earlier than 22 weeks. I can tell you that very few neonates born before this will live and 99% percent that do will develop intracranial hemorrhage. But there are actually a few documented cases of 22 workers not only living but graduating top of their class. Being female and being black for some unknown reason increases the chances of making it. But I say 22 weeks. Others might say 21 or perhaps 23. I have personally cared for a lot of 23 weekers that lived. Most developed head bleeds and had severe cognitive deficiency. But a few actually managed to survive and be perfectly normal. This is one of the reasons viability is controversial. It is not an exact science.
But the amazing thing about Roe was the right to privacy that magically disappeared once a certain gestation was reached. One day you can get an abortion because you have a right to privacy but the next day that right to privacy no longer exist. The whole argument as written was very weak and they knew it. Casey did nothing to strengthen the argument but changed it to viability. It is a complicated subject that comes down to the tenth amendment and weather or not the constitution grants the federal government control over the issue or weather or not abortion is a constitutional right. Dont get me started on the 9th amendment and unenumerated rights. Most people don't even know the history of that amendment and why it even exist.
Very balanced and informative video. Good job.
*hands a plate of cookies
Thanks for the kind words and cookies!
The way he described abortion as “killing” at 1:36 sounded a little biased to be fair. As well as the constant describing the fetus as a “baby” 😬
@@JKDC97 agree with the first half
So basically she had the baby never got a abortion and she started a whole political concept about women’s rights switched and from pro choice to pro life 😵😵😵
King Imperious
Soooo Ironic
I think you kid of missed the point of the video
Also, "women's rights" are not a monolithic concept. There was no secret group that got together and voted to "switch sides"
Nuanced thinking is a good thing.
@@davidnotonstinnett it's not a right it's a luxury because since women have the right to out that of motherhood it does not make any provision for men to opt out of fatherhood and if you say just get a condom this can happen out of spermjacking, adultery Etc.
That's how I think would be the best way to nullify it. A woman's body but a man's wallet
@@colbalt95 Yeah, utter imbecilic nonsense. A man can "NOT" come inside a woman's body, a woman cannot prevent her body from producing fertilizable ova. Even "the pill!" is not foolproof. If you pump a female full of your baby batter you HAVE made your decision.
Spermjacking is literally a Once in several million "(un)likelihood" Adultery is easily proven by a DNA /paternity test, except if you got cuckolded by an identical twin, which most human beings do not have and even less will see involved in adultery with their spouse. You want to deny a basic human right (to not play incubator for a separate lifeform) based on cherrypicked "possibilities" that might financially but not physiologically harm males that did have a different choice than insemination?
Good luck arguing that one in any reasonable group.
@bruhhh logical
100abortionphotos.com here is your logic
go back to your craphole
Here after Roe v. Wade has been projected to be overturned
Guess what. It has been officially over turned
1:36 I am surprised no one has gotten mad about the fact that he said "killed."
It's just the truth. They can handle the truth.
Kinda funny how because the Supreme Court took too long Roe ended up giving birth anyway and putting the baby up for adoption
it's so obviously true
@@juanpabloflores8840 for you it is
YOU CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH!
I find it interesting how in her older years she regretted the law suit and became more religious and against abortions. Are you only gonna do the most popular court cases that we learn about in school or some of the less known ones as well? It would be interesting to maybe hear about some I haven't heard of before if there are any interesting ones.
I will mostly cover the landmark cases. However, I do plan on getting into some lesser known but interesting ones as well.
@@iammrbeat
Here's a case that's not well known, but which has fundamentally shaped US taxation since it was ruled: 240 US 1, Brushaber v Union Pacific (1916). In a decision written by Justice White, the opening 12 pages make abundantly clear how taxation works in the US, and what the effects of the 16th Amendment were as applied to the phenomenal income of railroad magnate Frank Brushaber. And we've been effectively ignoring that ruling ever since.
She was paid off to say she was pro-life she confessed it on her deathbed
who’s here after Roe V. Wade is overturned
me
It hasnt happened yet?
@@scotandiamapping4549 now it has
Ironic
Thanks for doing my idea of the "I'll see you for the next supreme court case Jury"
Heck yeah!
Update on her. She admitted to being PAID to say she switched from Pro-choice to pro-Life ! But the woman has since passed.
Everyone gets greedy above all else, Rest In Peace tho
Further legitimizes the pro choice argument and further weakens the pro life argument.
@Arynn Not really, it just shows that she was greedy enough to ping pong between whatever side paid her the most.
@@ThunderTheBlackShadowKitty It doesn't. Abortion is murder and now amount of money flow will ever change that.
wait how?
@@ThunderTheBlackShadowKitty
Awesome stuff!!! I'm exited to see a new series at it's peak; super glad you started with this one! I did suggest it on one of your earlier videos!!! Please feel free to reply!!!!
Heck yeah David. It was a great suggestion. This series will probably last quite awhile!
Imagine the video for the "Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization" case, it's going to be an interesting one.
Man there is something beautifully dumb in a woman who didn't want a kid, sued the state for an abortion and then gave it up for adoption; only then to say other women can't have an abortion but should carry it to term and must look after it properly. Genius.
Exactly! And some will say "Just give it up for adoption" Like do they know how fucked up the foster care system is!??😒
Yeah genius because the mother gets to go on with her life, while the baby is still you know ALIVE.
@@JJ-zg7ug Yeah what we need is more children in adoption centres; places that are famous for the great treatment of children and definitely not a place where they will probably get molested/bullied viciously.
Can't look after a kid, don't have one. Adoption should be for kids who have fallen through the cracks in society or have dead parents, not because the mother couldn't abort a cluster of cells within her.
@@kiandocherty3589 the fuck do you know about the foster care system? people talk about foster care like it's some kind of hell on earth but you probably don't even know how it works.
the majority of people on earth experience worse things than being in foster care. I grew up in southern India and living conditions there are way worse than anything I've here. following your logic, I shouldn't have been born, my parents shouldn't have been born, and everyone in every undeveloped country should just die.
@@omarduncan4904 Even if the foster care system was messed up as your claiming probably without knowing what it truly is, it doesnt excuse abortion, because it only has to be better than death. The inadequecies of this world do not excuse more evils to be committed.
You handled this video in an unbiased manner. Good for you. A plus.
Hey, are the sources used for the video listed in here? Thanks!
It’s so nuts how this is being overturned. My father hadn’t even been BORN yet when it happened.
My parents where 6 during this ruling it’s crazy
@@immaheadout4777 I like to think that they were playing with a stuffed tiger.
@@elijahfordsidioticvarietys8770 My parents told me that a rightwing minority has been slowing taking over since the 1980s
@@immaheadout4777 oh, well that’s true.
Now it is official overturned
Who’s here after this Supreme Court case was officially expunged?
*raises hand*
*_raises_* *_hand_*
Time to make a new version,
Looks like we’re gonna need an update
Honestly I hope we get a video on not just the Texas heartbeat bill but also what caused the overturning of Roe v Wade bc not many people know how the case that overturned roe got to the Supreme Court so I think it would be a good video.
Excellent Video as usual. Can't wait Marberry v Madison
Thank you Nick! I actually already made one a few years back, but I am thinking about updating/expanding on it. ruclips.net/video/m1VAmWxpLjU/видео.html
Now make a video on Roe V Wade being overturned.
The ending was a twist
Interestingly enough Roe later became Pro Choice again right before her death.
She claimed she never was "pro life". She said it was "all an act" and that she was paid to be a figure head for the movement.
Also, while the case was going through the courts she started dating a woman, Connie Gonzales. They eventually moved in with each other. When she became a Christian she said the relationship was platonic and later on she said she was no longer a lesbian, though they still lived together until 2006. Near her death she called the renouncement of her sexuality financial motivated.
@@harrywood6502 roe was weird and kind of hypocritical.
@@harrywood6502 bruh, that woman. I don't get her. Is she lesbian or no lesbian? Is she pro-choice or pro-life?
@@susanaa.6692 she is definitely human , can't make up their mind on what they want .
You gonna do an update to this video or not?
We should get one. In fact he should do a live stream about the whole term because it's very consequencial
Need the follow up
thank u thank u thank u so much for this simple yet concise summary of the case
I know what to put into my presentation now.
Are you going to make a follow up video to this?
Man, RUclips Recommendations are scarily creepy.
who is here after the SCOTUS overturned roe v wade
Lovin your videos. Will use them in my own high school teaching.
Heck yeah! Many more SCOTUS cases to come :)
Went from safe, legal, and rare to on demand and taxpayer funded. Oh the joys.
How is abortion being illegal in thirty states resulting in women having to get back-alley and unsafe abortions 'safe, legal and rare?'
@@michaelmilam7285almost no one has to get an abortion. Women who have to get an abortion due to medical issues are extremely rare. The overwhelmingly vast majority of abortions are done out of convenience.
@@dustincaso6781 yeah but you didn't answer the question of them having been 'safe and legal' when they are definitely no longer legal and spur people towards unsafe practices
@@michaelmilam7285 what? Abortions are still legal, they’re just restrictions. They are also safe. The saying used to be safe, legal, and rare. Now the left says celebrate your abortion, have it on demand, and tax payer funded.
@@dustincaso6781 when you say 'went from' on a video about Roe v. Wade it comes across as if you wish we could go back to pre Roe
RIP Roe
(1973-2022)
rip bozo you wont be missed 😂😂😂🚬
rest in piss
Great information, really helped me with school project
Who’s here after Roe v Wade got overturned.
Me. Happy but much more happy seeing NY getting Fd by Bruen
It's funny seeing the pro life and pro choice duking it out.
Fantastic explanation of the case. Thank you for posting!
It’s really interesting how people take sides without actually reading the case itself and understanding what the court actually said instead of listening to politicians and biased news
Im interested in court cases. I read a university text book about Australian constitutional law (cos i live and am a citizen of here). A few very interesting cases here too.
Honestly, this just goes to show the importance of thinking long-term. Looking back, the 2016 election actually held the future of abortion in the balance and none of us knew it. And I blame Obama for not codifying abortion when he had the chance.
Obama, Clinton, Carter, all had a chance to codify it and all of them declined. Bella Abzug was right: a SCOTUS decision isn't enough.
Codification of abortion rights raises significant questions and I doubt this court would allow it.
@@cainankeyles9019they would probably allow it as this court didn’t rule abortions legal or not
They just ruled they had no authority to decide as the constitution makes no mention
@@universalplayz7496 Seems unlikely to me that the Supreme Court would determine that the 14th amendment doesn't protect abortion but Congressional enforcement of the 14th amendment can
@@cainankeyles9019 can’t they just make a federal law and since they didn’t consider abortion illegal it would be a legal law to make abortion allowed in every state idk?
Mr Beat’s channel is place for civil discussion. So please keep things in the realm of a reasonable debate.
I’m really wondering how Norma McCorvey’s child is doing.
Wait. *Roe* didn’t have a viability analysis. It specifically had a trimester schedule schema that was overruled by *Casey* when the Court instituted a viability analysis
Interview with Baby Roe:
ruclips.net/video/CwpbZqSdzb4/видео.html
Hello everyone in 2022 who’s here after they heard the rumors that the Supreme Court was going to overturn it.
It's like we are evolving backwards.... again
@American Eagle let women decide what they want to do with their body.
@@tatogreen You mean keep them from taking responsibility for their actions
Not rumors
Anyone here after the leaked draft aimed at overturning this case?
Lol. "Leaked"
Might need to update this one soon Mr. Beat
I cant believe it began its journey in Texas and came back to being banned in Texas.
A lot of folks are actively working to get this ruling, still one of the most controversial Supreme Court rulings of all time, overturned. I'm not worried about them deciding states can outlaw abortions if they wish. I'm more concerned that they'll rule personhood begins at conception, and thus force all states to outlaw abortions whether they want to or not.
BTW, this ruling, surprisingly, wasn't the top story in newspapers of the day. That was the death of former President Lyndon Johnson.
The life of a human being does begin at conception
How would that be a bad thing? Does a woman have 2 sets of DNA, 4 arms, 2 hearts, 4 legs etc. for a few months and then just not? That makes no sense whatsoever.
@@mathildeyoung1823 not really. A zygote can’t survive outside the womb. It has no brain, heart, skin, or any features that make it human. It’s literally a clump of human cells.
@@totalhufflepuff203 A human zygote has all the features it needs to be a human being at that stage. There are differences in all the stages of the life of a human being. None of those differences justify killing.
Besides by the time a woman even finds out she is pregnant the unborn child in her womb is past the zygote stage of life.
3 years later it happened
whatever side you are on you got to give this guy respect for hows he taking a very sensitive subject.
Imagine how that child felt, his mom wanted to kill her/him child so much she lied and sued texas to kill him/her. I would be fucked up knowing I'm only alive because a court case was delayed.
Kaiser Wilhelm II I’m confused
@@kaiserwilhelmii9897 Two Wilhelms!
Carlos E I’m the real one
Maybe I’m jaded, but I would be fine with that knowledge if I were to be that child. Like, who cares? I’m here, aren’t I? And the world is shit to begin with.
I wish I had been aborted. Not like I’m contributing a great deal lot to the world or bettering others life like that. My lack of existence wouldn’t have changed anything.
@@rosedalinevaletine6931 you are loved and so important
Will you being doing a video on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization?
Oh yeah
@@iammrbeat will u do it in the near future or the far future
This aged, poorly... Well fun fact, this was decided the same day Lyndon Johnson (probably my third favourite president) died, Johnson supported abortion rights.
He appointed Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court in 1967.
@@abrahamlincoln937 Who was pretty great as well. People fail to realize that LBJ was more progressive then JFK, which is strange since he was born in rural Texas in 1909. I like him, up here in Canada, he’d have made a fine prime minister.
@@samhunt9361 LBJ was born on August 27, 1908 in Stonewall, Texas. And both JFK and LBJ were very liberal, though LBJ was more effective at working with Congress and passing legislation than JFK was.
Didn't he also expand the war on Vietnam? Yeah I wouldn't call him the best president.
LBJ was awful and abortion isn't a "right".
And its gone
Finally no more child killing
Funny how this was recommended to me by the youtube algorithm after roe v wade was overturned
I know that Warren E. Burger was the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court during the US Supreme Court Case
Roe v. Wade and Warren E. Burger was an American Lawyer and Warren E. Burger was the 15th Chief Justice of the
US Supreme Court from June 23, 1969 to September 26, 1986 and Warren E. Burger was Appointed by
President Richard Nixon and from June 23, 1969 to September 26, 1986 was 17 Years and Warren E. Burger was the
Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court for 17 Years and Warren E. Burger had a Job for 17 Years and
Warren E. Burger Retired from his Job as the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court in 1986 and
it’s Amazing when someone has a Job for 17 Years as an Adult.
their was no reason to say “thought of killing” out of pocket for real.
She literally sought out an abortion when she was pregnant with that particular baby
killing
/ˈkɪlɪŋ/
(Noun) an act of causing death, especially deliberately.
(Adjective) causing death.
Abortion causes the death of the fetus. There’s no ifs or buts about it. It’s correct.
@@jibrilly Removing a cancer cell also a killing of that cell. There is no debate about that either.
Abortion: The termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus.
Death: The action or fact of dying or being killed; the end of the life of a person or organism.
Welp, this just got overturned
Roe v. Wade has officially been overturned on June 24, 2022.
Mr. Lincoln, what’s your opinion on this?
@Awesome Cat agreed
@Awesome Cat look I remain neutral on this but comparing abortion being taken away in some states is just as great as slavery abolished
I mean I don’t care if you do but I just wanna know if that’s what you think
good video! very helpful for a homework assignment I'm doing.
I am sure we will have a civil and respectful arguments in the comments
Oh yeah *Totally* since I’m neutral I’m fine but everyone else will also be civil
*NOT*
Hey Mr. Beat I think you have a fresh brief to make as of today sir
Two actually. NYSRPA vs Bruen is also extremely impactful
“Don’t worry professor, I was an accident too!”
This was SOOO WELL EXPLAINED 😭 i hatee how all these other channels use SO MUCH LEGALESE to the point that i cannot understand it at all. As a first year law student I think i love you 🥹🫶🏼
Part 2 coming out soon?
That was a roller coaster of a life story for Jane Rose!
I think even for people wanting to carry out the pregnancy and give it up afterwards it would be great to have some form of government or charity covered medical and psychiatric care. First and foremost though we should focus on programs for foster children and also we need to stop demonizing people who get abortions as a last resort. The bitterness between pro-choice and pro-life is understandable, but we need to calm sown and empathize with each other if we want a better world for both women and babies. One day we might be able to take that cluster of stem cells and put it into a magic machine that takes over for mother and neither side will be hurt but until then I hop both sides can walk in each others shoes.
I 100 percent agree
Point taken, but I rather prefer the human potential for getting hurt and for being invovled.
Abortion isn't a last resort. Adoption is. Unless you're talking about life-threatening pregnancies, which are exceedingly rare, abortion SHOULD be demonised in order to lower the rates and make it less acceptable.
They are not cluster of cells. At 5 weeks it starts to form into the shape of a baby.
@@NinjaDog9123 Well all humans are clusters of cells, as are all multicellular organisms, which is where their argument breaks down. "Cluster of cells" is a term for dehumanization but it literally makes no sense.
This one needs an update... Or at least cover the ruling that came out recently
Let's see how it'll age
Badly
Terribly
Watching this episode right now because of the recent SCOTUS decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
Great video, but what caused Norma to change from pro-choice to pro-life? If she wanted to have the abortion and was aware of the landmark SCOTUS case, shouldn't she be an advocate for pro-choice through the years?
She was actually paid to be a pro-life advocate. Sickening.
She didn't have any reason to become pro life, she could still be a pro choice and money funding would be the same. I think there is a new lie, to disregard Jane Roe later opinion about abortion. Either way is your choice to believe in the supreme court decision or not.
@@MoonlightXYZ she prolly had some mental trauma from the case they should have protected her idenity
So this is the first episode of Supreme Court briefs, wow!
I had to do a project in school about a Supreme Court case. This video helped a lot.
Thank you
This sure hasn’t aged well
this didn't age well.
I wouldn’t say like it’s completely outdated, it is just that there is a part 2 that hasn’t been made into this series jet.
A tiny little error at 0:55: the test case originally had two defendants, each given the pseudonyms Jane Doe and *Mary* Roe. Norma McCorvey was Mary Roe.
I don't normally comment, but I love your Channel!
I would love to see a video on Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46
It’s a sad day Roe v. Wade has been overturned 😭
Yay more baby’s
@@avus-kw2f213 babies in poverty and unready mothers*
Yea who’s gonna pay for all those unwanted babies-.
@@DiamondTurtleGamer let’s start killing poor people then : )
@@sadie4645 The government because we don’t kill poor people
This man is a life savor for AP Gov
Pizza and beer for the pregnant woman, sounds great.
You should do one about Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
Since Abortion is now NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED
Well you clearly need it
@@defaultusername1145 What?
@@tyler_darkwinner dogs v Jackson didn’t make abortion illegal it said abortion was not constitutionally protected thus allowing states to make the decision on allowing or making it illegal
@@defaultusername1145 Whatever that’s what I meant
@@tyler_darkwinner that’s a pretty big difference
This aged badly
Well this is suddenly relevant again
3:38 that stock image you used is really hilarious considering where I live. That picture was taken in South Africa. You see those types of flyers all over. The flyers are witch doctors advertising what is advertised is really hilarious: "Lost Lover?" "Safe free abortion" "Penis enlargement". I once saw one that said "Rats bring money to you"
R.I.P Roe v Wade.
Don't listen to Cat of Awesomeness. He's a right wing extremist who shoves religion down other people's throats.
@Awesome Cat no. Why are you against abortions?
@@abeIincoIn based lincoln
Rest in piss.
Hello post-Roe watchers
Hi and this is great
I know this video has been out for a while, so It's probably a long shot to hear from you, but I have been having trouble figuring out the Justices' rationale for how the right to privacy plays into abortion rights. I couldn't find a satisfactory answer elsewhere online, so I'd really appreciate one from you. Thanks, and I'm loving these supreme court briefs.
Because Democrats are crazy and helped rule it unconstitutional to not have the right to kill babies
Because people are pushing they're religious views on women. I am a male but understand how women can be scared about the immense pain they have to go through. There is no non-religious reason women have to stay virgins to not experience the pain. Men don't have to experience it at all. If it's a religious point people should just not get one instead of forcing strangers to keep their baby.
@@NathanBB2005 people don't want people to kill babies I don't care if they keep it or put it for adoption no one should have the right to take the life of someone else if it's not self-defense
@@supermegabosstea They're technically not humans yet
@@NathanBB2005 what other animal would it be cat or dog and you might be ignoring or not educated on the fact most abortions happen when the baby is very well formed with arms legs fingers and toes and I'm not saying this as an insult calling you dumb or anything because people overlook things all the time but it's important to get all the facts before you risk ending a life
Mr. Beat, I would be interested to know your views about the power that the Supreme
Court has. Everybody is currently concerned about who will replace Anthony Kennedy because a lot is at stake since he has been a swing voter. But nobody asks if it make sense that the Supreme Court (let alone a unique member of it) has so much power. In a democracy the people themselves would decide on the most important issues by referendum. More arguments in my video "Maybe you are ready for Democracy".
THAT WAS A ROLLERCOASTER
great video- keep it up with the good stuff. i would like to see gideon v- wainwright
+Baltazar Rodriguez Excellent suggestion. Thank you!
I have to say your comment on Norma McCorvey @ 1:30 having the baby as opposed to "killing it " is rather telling.
Telling of what?
@@iammrbeat it seems like a loaded word; "killing " , it implies that the fetus is a life to be "killed " . Even doctors won't use that term . A more politically neutral term would be "termination" , I think.
I don't profess to know your mind , but if I were an abortions rights advocate , I would consider the term inflammatory and even politically charged .
That said , I enjoyed your even handed synopsis of this case . Even my law professors failed to maintain your objectivity when lecturing on Roe .
@@exmcgee1647 "termination" could, in turn, be described as a euphemism and thus also be telling. The two words are basically synonyms anyway.
Love from Taipei. Being a reader of the "Freakonomics" I must say this case SIGNIFICANTLY altered American life, perhaps to government convenience, the choice of limiting unwanted children reduced crime rate. As cruel as the mean could sound for some, the end result saved lives and pointless spending for the govt.on crime prevention. However recent police violence had shown a reverse trend of the government side for, as consequence, instigating crime not preventing it. I personally consider this case as important to American history as Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.
Watch the documentary called AKA Jane Roe. She admits that the "pro-life" movement paid her to say she was "pro-life". She didn't really switch sides.