Abortion Rights Movement in the US
Applying the Constitution to modern day issues is a resurfacing occurrence we see in society. In regard to civil rights, neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights mention equality beyond due process. Further, it is only ensured that the law merely treats all citizens in the same way. It was not until the twentieth century that change was brought about for injustices faced by racial and ethnic minorities, as well as women.
The evolution of social attitudes has had a major influence over the rights and freedoms granted to women. An appeal to choice, for example, is undeniably powerful at this point in history. Specifically, the freedom of choice over one’s body continues to be grappled with today. From the legalization and de-criminalization of birth control in 1965 to today’s abortion-rights movement, the freedom to make decisions about a woman’s body remains a debate in society.
As decided by the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade in 1973, a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy is on private grounds rather than on the grounds of equal protection guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the discourse regarding reproductive rights remains controversial and continues to be challenged in society today. In an article published in the Washington Post, the abortion rights movement, as well as the anti-abortion rights movement, are evaluated for their distinct underlying motives.
The abortion movement is described as it violates the spirit of civil rights. For the right to access an abortion is viewed as the freedom of choice over one’s body, and restricting this access thus removes this freedom. Therefore, the movement to legalize and decriminalize abortions is considered a movement towards female autonomy. While the movement for abortion is driven by individual choice, the movement for anti-abortion is instead focused on saving human lives. Opposing arguments of individual choice recognize how the fetus is still biologically human and has the inherent capacity to develop into a child, and abortion exploits one human life to benefit another. Inclusion, and a more expansive definition of human community, is thus an underlying motive of the anti-abortion movement. Because both sides of abortion rights, pro-life and pro-choice, have such prominent arguments, in addition to the outcome of the Supreme Court’s decision in 1973, legislature is difficult to pass nationally to advance either side. However, since Roe v. Wade, anti-abortion advocates have worked to make abortion inaccessible within states, while also creating legal precedents that could help overturn the Supreme Court’s decision. However, the support of a president, who is an advocate for pro-life, has allowed movement to further this inaccessibility.
President Trump has vowed to restrict access to abortions and has pursued strategies that are aligned with his views on reproductive rights. The Trump Administration has proposed cuts and eliminated funding for many family planning programs, as he has also nominated federal judges who share this opposition to abortion rights. While there have indeed been previous presidents who also have shared this opposition to abortion, the difference with Trump’s administration is the fast expansiveness towards progress for anti-abortion policies and representatives. However, opponents to abortion are aware that their biggest obstacle is ultimately the Senate, where they lack the 60 votes required to pass legislation.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/at-home-and-abroad-trump-moves-to-broaden-abortion-fight/
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/01/22/579661047/in-trumps-first-year-anti-abortion-forces-make-strides