Abortion has proven itself to be one of the most divisive issues in modern American politics (Ziegler 2009, 281). Although states did not begin to criminalize abortion until the mid-19th century, largely due to a group of doctors which argued that the procedure was damaging American society, abortion was largely practiced throughout much of American history (Stevenson 2019, 19). Since the Supreme Court of the United States has the power through judicial review to determine the constitutionality of state legislation, the abortion issue eventually made its way through the court system. Abortion has proven itself to be a complicated section of law for both courts and lawmakers. Initially, in the landmark Roe v. Wade (1973) case, the court gave women the right to seek an abortion prior to viability through an inferred constitutional right to privacy. This research aims to determine whether the Roe decision was sufficiently supported by the prior court precedent. Further, this research also aims to determine ideological shifts in the court bench, the consistency of Justices' constitutional interpretations in abortion cases, and which constitutional interpretation, if any, effectively protects women’s right to choose. Finally, this research aims to determine whether the Dobbs court was justified in overturning the Roe precedent under their cited reasoning and relevant case precedent.
","abstract_html":"<p>Abortion has proven itself to be one of the most divisive issues in modern American politics (Ziegler 2009, 281). Although states did not begin to criminalize abortion until the mid-19<sup>th</sup> century, largely due to a group of doctors which argued that the procedure was damaging American society, abortion was largely practiced throughout much of American history (Stevenson 2019, 19). Since the Supreme Court of the United States has the power through judicial review to determine the constitutionality of state legislation, the abortion issue eventually made its way through the court system. Abortion has proven itself to be a complicated section of law for both courts and lawmakers. Initially, in the landmark <em>Roe v. Wade</em> (1973) case, the court gave women the right to seek an abortion prior to viability through an inferred constitutional right to privacy. This research aims to determine whether the <em>Roe</em> decision was sufficiently supported by the prior court precedent. Further, this research also aims to determine ideological shifts in the court bench, the consistency of Justices' constitutional interpretations in abortion cases, and which constitutional interpretation, if any, effectively protects women’s right to choose. Finally, this research aims to determine whether the <em>Dobbs</em> court was justified in overturning the <em>Roe</em> precedent under their cited reasoning and relevant case precedent.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Guerra, Evelyn Danielle"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts (MA)","degree_level":"Masters Thesis","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dr. Marek Steedman","Dr. Kate Greene","Dr. Iliyan Iliev"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2024,"date_issued":"2024-05-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2024-05-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:45:40Z","subjects":["Abortion","Supreme Court","Law","Justice","Constitutional Interpretations","Women's Rights","American Politics","Courts","Fourteenth Amendment","Law and Gender","Supreme Court of the United States"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/1032","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dr. Marek Steedman","Dr. Kate Greene","Dr. Iliyan Iliev"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Guerra, Evelyn Danielle"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2030-05-01T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Masters Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (MA)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Abortion","Supreme Court","Law","Justice","Constitutional Interpretations","Women's Rights","American Politics","Courts","Fourteenth Amendment","Law and Gender","Supreme Court of the United States"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/1032"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Abortion has proven itself to be one of the most divisive issues in modern American politics (Ziegler 2009, 281). Although states did not begin to criminalize abortion until the mid-19th century, largely due to a group of doctors which argued that the procedure was damaging American society, abortion was largely practiced throughout much of American history (Stevenson 2019, 19). Since the Supreme Court of the United States has the power through judicial review to determine the constitutionality of state legislation, the abortion issue eventually made its way through the court system. Abortion has proven itself to be a complicated section of law for both courts and lawmakers. Initially, in the landmark Roe v. Wade (1973) case, the court gave women the right to seek an abortion prior to viability through an inferred constitutional right to privacy. This research aims to determine whether the Roe decision was sufficiently supported by the prior court precedent. Further, this research also aims to determine ideological shifts in the court bench, the consistency of Justices' constitutional interpretations in abortion cases, and which constitutional interpretation, if any, effectively protects women’s right to choose. Finally, this research aims to determine whether the Dobbs court was justified in overturning the Roe precedent under their cited reasoning and relevant case precedent.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Shaping the Supreme Court"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dr. Marek Steedman","Dr. Kate Greene","Dr. Iliyan Iliev"],"dc:creator":["Guerra, Evelyn Danielle"],"dc:date.available":["2030-05-01T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Abortion has proven itself to be one of the most divisive issues in modern American politics (Ziegler 2009, 281). Although states did not begin to criminalize abortion until the mid-19th century, largely due to a group of doctors which argued that the procedure was damaging American society, abortion was largely practiced throughout much of American history (Stevenson 2019, 19). Since the Supreme Court of the United States has the power through judicial review to determine the constitutionality of state legislation, the abortion issue eventually made its way through the court system. Abortion has proven itself to be a complicated section of law for both courts and lawmakers. Initially, in the landmark Roe v. Wade (1973) case, the court gave women the right to seek an abortion prior to viability through an inferred constitutional right to privacy. This research aims to determine whether the Roe decision was sufficiently supported by the prior court precedent. Further, this research also aims to determine ideological shifts in the court bench, the consistency of Justices' constitutional interpretations in abortion cases, and which constitutional interpretation, if any, effectively protects women’s right to choose. Finally, this research aims to determine whether the Dobbs court was justified in overturning the Roe precedent under their cited reasoning and relevant case precedent.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/1032"],"dc:subject":["Abortion","Supreme Court","Law","Justice","Constitutional Interpretations","Women's Rights","American Politics","Courts","Fourteenth Amendment","Law and Gender","Supreme Court of the United States"],"dc:title":["Shaping the Supreme Court"],"thesis:degree_level":["Masters Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (MA)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:45:40Z"}