宪法案例六罗伊诉韦德.doc

宪法案例六：宪法案例六：Roe v. Wade 案案Roe v. Wade，410 U.S. 113（1973）背景：背景： 关于堕胎的事实和历史是，殖民时期的美国是允许在“胎动”前堕胎的然而从 19 世纪中 期开始，美国各州推动禁止堕胎的制定法，到 1900 年，除一个州之外，美国所有州都通过 法令将堕胎定为犯罪 但在 20 世纪 50 年代之后，美国社会发生了重大变化，全国范围内都在改革关于堕胎的刑 事法律如在 1967-1973 年间，阿拉斯加、夏威夷、纽约、华盛顿四州废止了堕胎律令， 13 个州进行了节制的改革在 Roe 案判决之前，挑战有关堕胎的刑事法律的诉讼就已经在 超过一打的州取得胜利案情：案情： 1969 年，一位化名 Jane Roe 的 20 岁左右妇女（其真实姓名为 Norma McCorvey）向德克萨 斯州刑法提出了挑战Wade 是达拉斯县的检察官 德州刑法规定，除了依照医嘱、为拯救母亲生命而进行堕胎之外，其他一切堕胎均为刑事 犯罪原告罗伊声称，她遭受强奸而怀孕，德州法律禁止堕胎，她又付不起钱到那些可以 合法堕胎的州进行手术，故不得不继续妊娠；分娩之后，她将孩子交给了不知身份的人收 养。

罗伊认为，一个孕妇有权单独决定在什么时间、以什么方式、为何种理由而终止妊娠， 德州刑法剥夺了她的选择权，因而违反了联邦宪法被告德州政府主张，生命始于受孕而 存在于整个妊娠期间，因此，在妇女妊娠的全过程，都存在保护生命这一不可抗拒的国家 利益；宪法所称之“人” （Person）包含胎儿，非经正当法律程序而剥夺胎儿生命为第 14 修正案所禁止之行为判决：判决： 案件一直上诉到最高法院1973 年，最高法院 7：2 多数意见裁定：德州刑法禁止堕胎的 规定过于宽泛地限制了妇女的选择权，侵犯了第 14 修正案的正当程序条款所保护的个人自 由 判决具体内容是—— Held: 1. While 28 U.S.C. § 1253 authorizes no direct appeal to this Court from the grant or denial of declaratory relief alone, review is not foreclosed when the case is properly before the Court on appeal from specific denial of injunctive relief and the arguments as to both injunctive and declaratory relief are necessarily identical. P. 123.2. Roe has standing to sue; the Does and Hallford do not. Pp. 123-129. (a) Contrary to appellee's contention, the natural termination of Roe's pregnancy did not moot her suit. Litigation involving pregnancy, which is “capable of repetition, yet evading review,“ is an exception to the usual federal rule that an actual controversy [p114] must exist at review stages, and not simply when the action is initiated. Pp. 124-125.(b) The District Court correctly refused injunctive, but erred in granting declaratory, relief to Hallford, who alleged no federally protected right not assertable as a defense against the good faith state prosecutions pending against him. Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66. Pp. 125-127.(c) The Does' complaint, based as it is on contingencies, any one or more of which may not occur, is too speculative to present an actual case or controversy. Pp. 127-129.3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life- saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a “compelling“ point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. Pp. 147-164. (a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician. Pp. 163, 164.(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health. Pp. 163, 164.(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. Pp. 163-164; 164-165.4. The State may define the term “physician“ to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined. P. 165.5. It is unnecessary to decide the injunctive relief issue, since the Texas authorities will doubtless fully recognize the Court's ruling [p115] that the Texas criminal abortion statutes are unconstitutional. P. 166.影响：影响： Roe 案的判决推翻了四十六个州的堕胎法，使全国范围内的堕胎合法化。

Roe 案的判决是 最高法院后来近 20 个涉及堕胎限制的判决的先例 从来没有一个判例像 Roe v. Wade 案那样引起广泛和持久的对立，堕胎成为自黑奴制之后 美国社会中意见最为歧异的问题：第十四条修正案：第十四条修正案： [1866 年 6 月 13 日提出，1868 年 7 月 9 日批准] 第一款第一款 所有在合众国出生或归化合众国并受其管辖的人，都是合众国的和他们居住州的公所有在合众国出生或归化合众国并受其管辖的人，都是合众国的和他们居住州的公 民任何一州，都不得制定或实施限制合众国公民的特权或豁免权的任何法律；不经正当民任何一州，都不得制定或实施限制合众国公民的特权或豁免权的任何法律；不经正当 法律程序，不得剥夺任何人的生命、自由或财产；在州管辖范围内，也不得拒绝给予任何法律程序，不得剥夺任何人的生命、自由或财产；在州管辖范围内，也不得拒绝给予任何 人以平等法律保护人以平等法律保护…… Amendment XIV Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.问题： 本案争议问题及涉及的宪法条文； 简述判决的主要内容； 关于本案中的宪法保障的权利及其界限； 法院对宪法条文解释的方法与技术。