Component 1 - devising

scene 2

blackmun - in that i mean all of you, including you wade!

it seems to me your honour that it is critical first that we prove this is a fundamental interest on behalf of the woman, that it is a constitutional right, and second…

wade - you’re going to be balancing the rights of the mother against the rights of the foetus

it seems to me that you do not balance the constitutional rights of one person against mere statutory rights of another

wade - so all the talk of compelling state interest is beside the point. it can never be compelling enough

if the state could show that the foetus was a person under the fourteenth amendment or under some other amendment or part of the constitution, then you would have the situation of trying - you would have a state compelling interest which in some instances can outweigh a fundamental right. this is not the case in this particular situation

blackmun - do you make any distinction between the first month and ninth month of gestation

our statute does not

wade - do you, in your position in this case

we are asking in this case that the court declare the statute unconstitutional, the state having proved no compelling interest at all. there are some states that now have adopted time limits. those have not yet been challenged and perhaps the question will be before this court. even those statutes though allow exceptions, well new york for example says an abortion is lawful up to 24 weeks. but even after the 24 weeks it is still lawful, where there’s rape or incest, where the mothers mental or physical health is involved. in other words, even after that period its not a hard and fast cut off

wade - then its the weighing process that mr justice blackman was referring to, is that your position

the legislature in that situation engaged in the weighing process, and it seems to me that it has not yet been determined whether the state has the compelling interest to uphold even that kind of relation, but that’s really not before the court in this particular case. we have no time limit, there is no indication in texas that any would be applied at any future date. you know, we just don’t know that but…

blackmun - mrs weddinjgton, your attacking the statute on two grounds, are you not, vagueness

that’s correct, your honour

blackmun - and the ninth amendment. do you base any weight on one argument as against the other

we are not here to advocate abortion. we do not ask this court to rule that abortion is good or desirable in any particular situation. we are here to advocate that the decision as to whether or not a particular woman will continue to carry or will terminate a pregnancy is a decision that should be made by that individual, that in fact she has a constitutional right to make that decision for herself, and that the state has shown no interest in interfering with that decision

blackmun - allowing the killing of people

yes, sir