BILL ANALYSIS
AJR 3
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AJR 3 (Cohn)
As Amended January 13, 2005
Majority vote
JUDICIARY 6-2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Jones, Evans, Laird, | | |
| |Levine, Lieber, Monta?ez | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Haynes, Leslie | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Memorializes the President of the United States (U.S.)
and Congress to protect and uphold the intent and substance of
the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) 410 U.S.
113). Specifically, this resolution makes the following
findings:
1)January 22, 2005 is the 32nd anniversary of the historic U.S.
Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade guaranteeing women's
reproductive rights, an occasion deserving of celebration and
special public commendations.
2)The 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade
established constitutionally based limits on the power of
states to restrict the right of a woman to choose to terminate
a pregnancy.
3)Roe v. Wade is one of the most significant Supreme Court
decisions in the 20th century promoting women's rights.
4)Reproductive rights are central to the ability of women to
exercise their full rights under federal and state law.
5)It is the right of every American woman to determine when, if,
and with whom to have children, and how many children to have.
6)Women's ability to control their reproductive lives has
facilitated their equal participation in the economic and
social life of the nation.
AJR 3
Page 2
7)The state should not interfere with a woman's decision to
either bear a child or terminate a pregnancy through a safe
and legal abortion.
8)Women should not be forced into illegal and dangerous
abortions as they often were prior to the Roe v. Wade
decision.
9)During the first half of the 20th century, illegal abortions
accounted for about 50% of all maternal deaths.
10)Roe v. Wade has significantly reduced the mortality rate for
women terminating their pregnancies.
11)Roe v. Wade continues to protect the health and freedom of
women throughout the U.S.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Recognizes a right to privacy protected under the U.S.
Constitution. ( Boyd v. United States (1886) 116 U.S. 616.)
2)Protects, explicitly, the right to privacy under the
California Constitution. (California Constitution, Article I,
Section 1.)
3)Holds that the constitutionally protected right to privacy
limits a state's power to restrict a woman's right to
terminate a pregnancy. ( Roe v. Wade. )
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : This joint resolution addresses the upcoming
anniversary of the landmark court case of Roe v. Wade . In 1973,
the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Roe v. Wade , that the
constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman's decision as
to whether to terminate a pregnancy, while acknowledging that
some state regulation was permissible. The case was filed by
"Jane Roe," an unmarried woman who wanted to end her pregnancy
under safe and clinical conditions but who was unable to get a
"legal" abortion in Texas because her life was not threatened by
the continuation of the pregnancy and she could not afford to
travel to another jurisdiction. She claimed that the Texas
AJR 3
Page 3
statutes abridged her right of personal privacy, therefore
challenging the Texas statute that made it a crime to perform an
abortion unless a woman's life was at stake. The Court struck
down the Texas law in finding for the first time that the
constitutional right to privacy "is broad enough to encompass a
woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."
The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized constitutional
protection of the right of privacy. ( See, e.g., Boyd v. United
States .) That right has been held to extend to matters of
procreation and contraception. ( Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942) 316
U.S. 535; Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) 381 U.S. 479.) In Roe
v. Wade , the Court held that this right also extended to a
woman's decision as to whether to terminate a pregnancy. The
Court also held that there are two compelling state interests
sufficient to justify restrictions on a woman's right to choose.
The Court found that: 1) states may regulate the abortion
procedure after the first trimester of pregnancy in ways
necessary to promote a woman's health; and, 2) after the point
of fetal viability, a state may, to protect the potential life
of the fetus, prohibit abortions not necessary to preserve a
woman's life or health.
From the day it was issued, the decision in Roe v. Wade has been
the subject of much debate, politically and legally. The
application and continued validity of the decision have been
frequently contested in the courts. In 1992, in Planned
Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) 505 U.S.
833, the Court reaffirmed Roe v. Wade , while at the same time
restricting its protection. Under Casey , states may impose
abortion restrictions as long as they do not "unduly burden" a
woman's right to choose. Under this new standard, the Court
approved interventions by the state, including a 24-hour waiting
period, which it had previously found to violate the right to
privacy.
The decision in Casey upheld Roe by the slimmest margin (5-4).
Any changes in the Supreme Court's membership could result in
further limiting or even overturning the Roe decision, thus
allowing states to substantially restrict a woman's right to
make reproductive choices. As further evidence of efforts to
limit a woman's right to make reproductive choices, in November
2003, Congress passed, and the President signed, the Partial
Birth Abortion Bill, which bans late-term abortions, without an
AJR 3
Page 4
exemption to protect the health of the mother.
Article 1, Section 1 of the California Constitution reads, "All
people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable
rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and
pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy." Thus
California's Constitution, unlike that of the United States',
gives explicit protection to the right of privacy, and the state
has a long history of vigorous protection of the privacy rights
of its citizens. This measure makes specific findings regarding
the importance of continued protection for a woman's right to
choose. It would convey to the President and the U.S. Congress
the support of the California Legislature for the protection
extended under Roe v. Wade on the occasion of the 32nd
anniversary of the decision.
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert and Meredith Nixon / JUD.
/ (916) 319-2334
FN: 0009364