Opinion
January 20
We were reminded of history this week when we honored the birthday of civil rights leader and American hero Martin Luther King, Jr. and as we watched the inauguration of our first African-American president, Barack Obama. But there is another historical occasion worthy of note this week that might be flying under your radar: Jan. 22 marks 36 years since the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade.
Roe, as it is often called, is one of the most politically charged cases in Supreme Court history. Ruling that most state laws regarding abortion violated a constitutional right to privacy, the Supreme Court declared that a woman, with the assistance of her physician, could choose to terminate a pregnancy up until the "point at which the fetus becomes viable" and with certain restrictions after that point. An imperfect ruling, Roe v. Wade is legally contentious because of the ambiguity of the term "viable" and its disputed basis of a constitutional right to privacy. The contentious decision has inspired vigorous debate over the function of the judiciary, the role of religion and morality in public life and who should determine the legality of an abortion.
With the swearing-in of a new administration and the decision's anniversary, now is a salient time to contemplate the future of Roe, to consider women's health in the United States and around the world, and to think about how President Obama may shape the Supreme Court. It is a time to reflect upon how this administration will impact a host of life-altering decisions, from the right to choose to marriage equality.
The alignment of these two historical moments begs a dialogue on these issues, one such which will begin here and continue with an address and Q&A session Friday, Jan. 23 at 7 p.m. with one of America's foremost experts on women's health and its accompanying political issues: Cecile Ann Richards. As President of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Ms. Richards is one of the most influential women in America. As the headline speaker for this first installment of the Tufts Democrats' "Issues of the Future Symposium" this weekend, we hope that Ms. Richards can shed some light on the future of the Supreme Court and on the shockwaves that Roe has sent through our society since 1973. The presentation, entitled "Cecile Ann Richards: Roe v. Wade and Future of the Supreme Court," is co-sponsored by VOX.
First, what is the future of the Roe decision? Let's briefly consider its past. Until the retirements and new appointments of the Bush administration, the Supreme Court maintained a 6-to-3 majority in favor of upholding a woman's right to choose. However, with the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court's margin dwindled to one vote, a vote that made supporters of abortion rights nervous, given that it hinged upon Justice John Paul Stevens — all of 88 years old — and the inconsistent Justice Anthony Kennedy. While this margin may seem irrelevant with the exit of the conservative Bush administration and the entrance of the pro-choice Obama, it certainly remains important. In the next four years, anywhere from one to three Supreme Court justices may step down. However, it is expected that all will come from the liberal end of the court; Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is 75 years old, and Stevens, in particular, are no spring chickens. Compounded by the likely postponement of retirement for conservative ringleader Justice Antonin Scalia, who is 72 years old, that tenuous one-vote majority is likely to remain throughout Obama's tenure. Reflecting on its future, even with the new administration, does not provide an overwhelming sense of security.
In addition, at this important time, we ought to think about women's health more generally. It is a new moment for women's health in this country. In the wake of last year's Center for Disease Control study indicating that one in four teen girls has a sexually transmitted infection and many studies demonstrating the ineffectiveness of abstinence-only instruction, the necessity of comprehensive education could not be more apparent. Over the past couple of years, 15 states independently rejected abstinence-only funding from the federal government in order to teach comprehensive sex education. Obama is likely to strike abstinence-only-dependent policies and thereby improve women's health at home.
It's also a new moment for women's health issues around the world. Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton has long been a champion of the rights of women and children. We hope she will lead the charge to repeal the global gag rule, a damaging policy which requires all non-governmental organizations that receive federal funding to refrain from performing or promoting abortion services in other countries. We also hope she will reinstate the funding of the U.N. Family Planning Program.
Yet, in a bigger way, we are optimistic that Secretary-designate Clinton will put her own words into action, noted by Cecile Richards in the Huffington Post: "Women's reproductive health and empowerment are critical to a nation's sustainability and growth ... we now know that no nation can hope to succeed in the global economy of the 21st century if half of its people lack the opportunity and the right to make the most of their God-given potential. No nation can move forward when its women and children are trapped in endless cycles of poverty; when they have inadequate health care, poor access to family planning, limited education." Although we honor the excellent work of the George W. Bush's President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, we anticipate more successes when one-third of prevention spending is no longer required to fund failing abstinence-only programs. Now is an exciting time for proponents of women's health issues.
Every year, the Tufts Democrats host the "Issues of the Future Symposium" to address pertinent political issues and to stimulate dialogue on campus. With our annual symposium, we strive to look to the future of a certain issue, using indicators of today to draw conclusions about the potential of an issue tomorrow. We hope that our past topics, ranging from immigration reform to civil-military relations, have opened up public discourse and contributed to a dynamic conversation on the Tufts campus. This year we are looking to the "Future of the Supreme Court" and how it will affect wedge issues like the right to choose and gay rights. We invite you to join us on Friday to consider the likelihood of the proposals outlined here, and to ask politely whatever question you would like of Ms. Richards, a woman who understands this issue better than anyone else in America.
On Saturday, we will continue our discussion with local leaders and professionals, this time focusing on the future of gay rights and marriage equality, in the second installment of the "Issues of the Future Symposium," entitled "The Supreme Court and Gay Rights," at 11:30 a.m. in the Crane Room.
