PubMed1989
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to review Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, a Missouri case that challenges the validity of legislative direction of public policy as outlined in Roe v. Wade, has fueled speculation that the Court will use the case to reconsider, and perhaps reverse, Roe. When the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade opened the door to legalized abortion, it guaranteed only a woman's right to choose to terminate or continue a pregnancy without undue interference by the state--citing legitimate grounds for "due" interference by the state. In 1986 the Missouri legislature passed a statute that regulated medical practices related to abortion, including broad restrictions on the expenditure of state funds. Further, the state attempted to protect viable fetuses and directed physicians to perform certain tests to ascertain the baby's gestational age. It also contained a legislative finding that "life begins at conception." A challenge was filed almost immediately. In its application for Supreme Court review, Missouri questioned whether the Roe "trimester approach for selecting the test for which state regulation of abortion services is reviewed should be reconsidered and discarded in favor of a rational basis test." It further argued that if Missouri's statutory provisions are unconstitutional under Roe, then "Roe v. Wade should itself be reconsidered." Under current jurisprudence, it is debatable whether this formulation of the case will invite direct review of Roe. For the foreseeable future, the law will likely protect the notion that an abortion decision implicates a fundamental liberty interest.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)