The key to this discussion isstare decisis, not abortion! Therefore, please leave personal attacks, religion, and politicsout. This case was selected in order to focus your attention on legal reasoning, despite your personal beliefs. In the realm of law and ethics, you will be expected to addresscontroversial issues. This assignment will help you rely upon facts, data, and legal precedent, instead of personal convictions.Therefore, any posts thatfail to address stare decisisas the main issue will bedeleted.

Part A: Draft arguments thatRoe v. Wadeis settled law under the concept of stare decisis.

Part B: Choose opposing posts, and draft arguments in opposition to those posts.

Roe v Wade was decided in 1973. The Supreme Court at that time determined that a woman had a right to choose. One of the "underpinning" issues of Roe is a right to privacy. The right to privacy is addressed in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 13th and 14th Amendments.

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed Roe v Wade 38 times (1). In 1992, Casey v Planned Parenthood,14 F.3d 848, the Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the core of Roe v. Wade, the right to privacy. In this case, the Supreme Court stated, "the ability of women to participate equally in economics and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives and that this ability to control their reproductive lives was enough of a reliance to sustain Roe."(2). This conclusion by the court specifically affirmed the doctrine stare decisis as it applies to Roe v Wade.(3)

In my opinion the original ruling in 1973, 38 reaffirmations, the 1992 affirmation of Roe v. Wade doctrine of Stare Decisis , the rights to privacy as indicated above, along with the fact that this law has become a law that has come "to be relied on"(4), makes it obvious that this is "settled law". However, Judge Alito's refusal to commit to one side or the other, has enabled him to avoid hanging himself with either the pro-life or the pro-choice side. In my opinion, Judge Alito is not correct in his refusal to acknowledge Roe v Wade as settled law.