The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing and recently heard oral arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. This case deals with a Mississippi state law that bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. There are many arguments on both sides of this case, some of which deal with whether the Supreme Court should either completely or partially overturn Roe v. Wade, which is considered precedent. Under Roe, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman has a constitutional right to have an abortion and (1) states are not allowed to prohibit abortions at all in the first trimester of pregnancy, (2) states are allowed to require reasonable health regulations of abortions during the second trimester, and (3) states may prohibit abortions during the third trimester as long as there are exceptions for saving the woman's life or health. Do you think the Supreme Court should completely or partially overturn Roe v. Wade? Would doing so hurt how we view precedent in this country? Would it hurt how we view the Supreme Court? Explain why or why not. Propose an argument on why is it a good law to overturn or let it stand as precedent.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

The Supreme Court regarded poised on Wednesday to uphold a Mississippi regulation that bans abortion... View the full answer