mental_floss magazine
SUBSCRIBE >
GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS >
DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS >
subscriber services >
With the Supreme Court ending its 2007-08 term, we thought this week was a good time to answer some questions you probably weren’t asking (but will nonetheless find interesting). All week, the honorable David Holzel will be presiding.
What was Marbury v. Madison?
M. v. M. was Chief Justice John Marshall’s 1803 ruling that the Court had the power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.
Marbury was William Marbury, whom outgoing President John Adams appointed justice of the peace in Washington, DC, as part of the Federalists’ attempt to maintain a presence as Thomas Jefferson and the Republicans swept into power. Madison was James Madison, the new Secretary of State, who, with Jefferson, refused to follow through with Marbury’s appointment.
Marbury took his claim to office directly to the Supreme Court. Marshall, realizing the Court stood to lose if it backed either Marbury or Jefferson, found a third way. He argued that the Constitution did not give the Supreme Court power to hear cases except on appeal from a lower court. And so, Marshall reasoned, the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional, because it gave the Court power to hear cases the first time.
Who were Roe and Wade?
Since the 1973 decision, reached by a 7-2 majority of the Court, recognizing a woman’s right to an abortion, the names Roe and Wade have gone together like a horse and carriage, salt and pepper, and Martin and Lewis.
Roe v. Wade overturned two state laws: a Texas law that prohibited abortion, except to save a woman’s life; and a Georgia law that permitted hospital-performed abortions to protect a woman’s health, provided they were approved by a hospital committee.
Roe was the plaintiff in the case. Jane Roe (rhymes with Doe), a pseudonym for Norma McCorvey, was a single, pregnant woman in Dallas County, Texas. She used the pseudonym to keep the facts of her pregnancy from the Court.
Wade was Henry Wade, the district attorney in Dallas County, Texas. As he was responsible for enforcing the Texas law, Wade was named defendant when Roe/McCorvey’s attorneys challenged the state’s abortion law. Wade had previously made a name for himself by prosecuting Jack Ruby, who killed Lee Harvey Oswald. Wade died in 2001.
Tomorrow: ‘The Wouldn’t-Be Justices: 8 Rejected Nominees’ (Or, in keeping with the FAQ format, ‘Who are some notable rejected Supreme Court nominees?’)
David Holzel is a freelance writer who writes the ezine The Jewish Angle.
* * * * *
Shhh…super secret special for blog readers.
I think the sadest part about Roe v. Wade is that Roe actually had to have the kid. So there is a kid out there somewhere who knows without a doubt that his/her mama didn’t want him/her.
Recaptcha: washington front
posted by kc on 6-30-2008 at 7:49 am
The story gets stranger. You can follow the website link to a Wikipedia entry to find out what subsequently happened to Norma “Roe” McCorvey.
posted by David H. on 6-30-2008 at 9:59 am
I know this is going to get me slammed into the wall but the truth is this: men and women were not created the same. Our bodies are different and it is the WOMEN who have to deal with the physical consequences of sex. We get pregnant, we give birth. If you are not prepared to face that consequence, then DONT HAVE SEX. I´m not die-hard pro-lifer but I really do believe that people do not stop to take measure of the consequences of their actions and then expect to have a quick fix once they get into trouble.
posted by GTT on 6-30-2008 at 10:57 am
The child was put up for adoption and probably has no idea his mom was ‘Roe’. Norma McCorvey is now a pro-life/anti-abortion activist.
posted by KM on 6-30-2008 at 1:25 pm
GTT -
And if you don’t want a kid, you shouldn’t have sex, either - even if you’re a man. It takes two! Fault is spread 50/50.
I love it when men comment on abortion. ::rolls eyes::
posted by Aaargh on 6-30-2008 at 6:32 pm
Well in response to GTT’s comment, and I knew someone was going to bring up how abortion is either right or wrong, and I’m not going to say weather it is or not but obviously I’ve got to respond and say that it isn’t as black and white as “don’t have sex”. Some women don’t get a choice on the matter and they don’t want to look at the “concequence” and be forced to think about what may have been an awful (incestuous or forced) experience for the rest of their lives. My theory on abortion is that people who oppose it have a problem with women being sexually liberated; when they think about abortion, they think about what led to the pregnancy, and that’s what they have a problem with, in the end.
posted by Anthea on 6-30-2008 at 7:00 pm
Row v. Wade is how they determine whether or not Cuban refugees are allowed to stay.
posted by PartiallyDeflected on 6-30-2008 at 7:14 pm
I enjoy peas.
posted by Marnie on 6-30-2008 at 9:22 pm
Aaargh: Actually, I´m a woman. It does take two but you realy have to think of who is left carrying the bundle. It´s your body, be careful how you use it.
posted by GTT on 7-1-2008 at 11:08 am
Accidents happen and timing may be wrong. It’s not fair to bring an unwanted child into the world when it cannot be cared for either monitarily or emotionally.
Abortion should NOT be used as a form of birth control, but there are times when it can be a reasonable option.
If I were raped, you cn be damn sure I would want the choice whether to carry that child or not. I was left with NO choice in the creation of the child, but I want the choice to decide to keep it or not. There is no way I would want to look into the kid’s face day in and day out and see my rapist. I understand some women may choose to keep the child, and that is their right.
If women lose the right to have an abortion, then Viagra should be outlawed. Why must women be the only sex with restrictions on what they can or can’t do with their bodies?
posted by Hallie Thompson on 7-1-2008 at 12:44 pm
Excellent! Then we’re decided. You don’t have sex or an abortion, and I’ll make my own decisions for based on what’s best for me!
See how that works? Everyone gets to decide for their own self.
Because that’s the way it should be.
posted by Aaargh on 7-1-2008 at 7:20 pm
All it comes down to is CHOICE. I don’t care about a woman’s personal decisions for having or not having an abortion, all that matters is that she has the right and the ability to make that choice for herself. I will never understand pro-lifers - it should be pro-responsibility. Men and women have a resposibility when they bring a child into this world and sometimes the most reponsible decision is to not have the baby. At the end of the day the pro-lifers are not going to help you raise your child or adopt them. Preserving the life that is already fully formed and a participating member of society is more important then one that (according to law) does not legally exist at conception. All I care about is that if I ever have to contemplate it, the choice is there for me to make and decide.
posted by Katie on 7-7-2008 at 10:15 am