• Home
  • Our Team
    • Michael S. Hiller
    • Lauren A. Rudick
    • Fatima Afia
    • Susan M. Fauls
    • Jessica Gonzalez
    • Paul M. Kampfer
    • Scott D. Woller
    • Jason E. Zakai
  • Commercial
    Litigation
    • What Is an Equitable Remedy?
  • Business
    Law
    • Drafting LLC Agreements
    • Let Our New York Employment Attorneys Negotiate Your Executive Employment Agreement
    • Partnership Formation
  • Cannabis Law
    • U.S. Supreme Court Petition
    • Amicus Briefs for Supreme Court Petition
    • Federal Cannabis Complaint
    • Press Release – Federal Cannabis Complaint
    • Press Release – Appeals Court Decision Is In
  • Land-Use &
    Zoning Law
  • Insurance
    Law
  • Disability
    Insurance Law
    • ERISA Long Term Disability Claims and Appeals Processes: Overview
    • Filing Your Disability Claim
    • Monitoring Your Approved Disability Claim
    • Long-Term Disability (LTD) Denial
    • Appealing Your Denied Disability Claim
    • Reasons for Disability Denial
    • ERISA Disability Lawsuits: Standards of Review
    • The Dangers of Social Media Interaction while Disabled
    • Proving Disability Based on Chronic Pain
    • Disability Claims FAQs
  • Employment
    Law
  • Success
    Stories
  • Articles
  • Blog
    • TBTLegal
    • HPC Blog
  • Contact
Menu navimg
  • Home
  • Our Team
    • Michael S. Hiller
    • Lauren A. Rudick
    • Fatima Afia
    • Susan M. Fauls
    • Jessica Gonzalez
    • Paul M. Kampfer
    • Scott D. Woller
    • Jason E. Zakai
  • Commercial
    Litigation
    • What Is an Equitable Remedy?
  • Business
    Law
    • Drafting LLC Agreements
    • Let Our New York Employment Attorneys Negotiate Your Executive Employment Agreement
    • Partnership Formation
  • Cannabis Law
    • U.S. Supreme Court Petition
    • Amicus Briefs for Supreme Court Petition
    • Federal Cannabis Complaint
    • Press Release – Federal Cannabis Complaint
    • Press Release – Appeals Court Decision Is In
  • Land-Use &
    Zoning Law
  • Insurance
    Law
  • Disability
    Insurance Law
    • ERISA Long Term Disability Claims and Appeals Processes: Overview
    • Filing Your Disability Claim
    • Monitoring Your Approved Disability Claim
    • Long-Term Disability (LTD) Denial
    • Appealing Your Denied Disability Claim
    • Reasons for Disability Denial
    • ERISA Disability Lawsuits: Standards of Review
    • The Dangers of Social Media Interaction while Disabled
    • Proving Disability Based on Chronic Pain
    • Disability Claims FAQs
  • Employment
    Law
  • Success
    Stories
  • Articles
  • Blog
    • TBTLegal
    • HPC Blog
  • Contact
Logo
Logo
(212) 319-4000
Email Us Directly
Close

Contact Us Today!

I have read theThe information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.disclaimer.
captcha

Home >> Blog>> Roe v. Wade – 42 Years Later – You Might Be Surprised At How Few Protections Are Left

Blog

22
Jan

Roe v. Wade – 42 Years Later – You Might Be Surprised At How Few Protections Are Left

42 years ago today, the US Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, which, at the time, established a woman’s unqualified constitutional right to choose whether to terminate a pregnancy during the first two trimesters — the generally accepted period during which the fetus is not viable outside the womb.  Do the same protections established in Roe still exist today?  You might be surprised.

Today, the once absolute right to an abortion during the first two trimesters is qualified by the state’s power to impose legislative conditions or limits upon women seeking to terminate their pregnancies.  And, as long as those conditions or limits are deemed by the courts not to impose an “undue burden” on a woman’s right to choose, they will be upheld, even during the first two trimesters. So, 24- to 72-hour waiting periods, the requirement that women watch videos and submit to counseling about fetal development prior to abortions, and other impositions are placed upon women and their right to terminate pregnancies.  Indeed, today, more than half of American states impose these or similar conditions on a woman’s right to choose. And the new Republican majority in Congress is planning to approve new federal limitations on abortion rights in the coming congressional term.

What do you think? Should states and the federal government be permitted to impose conditions on a woman’s right to choose during the first two trimesters? Suppose a state has just one facility that performs elective abortions and it’s 400 miles away – does a 72-hour waiting period (and the costs associated with travel and lodging) constitute an “undue burden?” How can anyone truly define the term “undue burden” and where does that term come from?

Archives

  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • August 2014

Email Us Today !

* The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does NOT establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.
captcha

connect with us

Hiller, PC 641 Lexington Ave. New York, NY 10022

Phone: (212) 319-4000 Fax: (212) 753-4530

View Map

Areas Served:

Hiller, PC serves individuals, community groups, and businesses throughout the New York metropolitan area, including New York City, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, Staten Island, and Long Island, and in Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland, and Kings counties. We also represent policyholders in insurance matters nationwide.

Hiller, PC © Copyright 2022   |   Disclaimer