Minimalism In Roe Vs Wade

870 Words4 Pages

Originalists and minimalists continue to challenge the ruling of Roe v. Wade, even till present day. Minimalists believe that the court approached the issues of the case through a unnecessary approach. Besides granting abortion rights to women, the court also implemented a complex trimester system, which specified what is and what is not allowed during each three-month time interval of a pregnancy. The Texas law that was challenged in Roe v. Wade, was extreme to say the least. It banned the right to an abortion even in difficult situation where the pregnancy results from rape or incest, and pregnancies that would potentially lead to detrimental health concerns for both the mother- to be and the fetus. Lawrence v. Texas, is …show more content…

Although it can be seen as a reasonable theory to implement in times of controversy, there are a few issues that still arise from this theory. Some weaknesses include inconsistency, and lack of substantiation, but one of the biggest flaws of living constitutionalism as argued by originalists, is that judges are given too much power, and belittle the power of the legislature and the American people. The main question that arises is how does the public know that judges are the best representatives to comprehend the nations fundamental values? Judges are granted the responsibility to alter the meaning of the constitution based on their own personal motives and beliefs, and they have powers that are far beyond those of legislators, who were structured to ensure representation of the American people. Congress and judges come from different environments, and different motives. Judges spend a vast majority of their time in monastic environments with only a minuscule staff, and don 't directly interact with the citizens as often as legislators. Legislators, especially those who wish to be elected or re-elected spend a lot of their time and energy focusing on the needs of the citizens. If this selected group of people are deemed to understand the public demand more than the judicial branch, than how come judges are the ones granted with the power to decided the faith of the people? Perfectionism has essence of …show more content…

As seen historically, the use of perfectionism in courts has allowed controversial cases to bring justice to many people, who were fighting for not only their own personal rights, but for rights of our nation. Without judges implementing a more modernized outlook on the Constitution, cases such as Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board of Education, and Lawrence v. Texas, would have resulted in different outcomes. Though there might be a great deal of people who would not agree on the decision of the courts in regards to abortions, segregation, and sexual conduct, many would at least agree that interpreting a document that was written over two hundred years ago might not be the most accommodating to all of the social changes that our nation comes

Open Document