Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- documents:external:warren_burger_was_defending_roe_v_wade [2022/02/27 11:13] – created Oliver Wolcott
+++ documents:external:warren_burger_was_defending_roe_v_wade [2022/02/27 11:20] – Oliver Wolcott
@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 Many fixed on the constitutional amendment process as such a remedy. Both the 11th and 14th amendments had been passed wholly or partly to reverse overreaching Supreme Court decisions, and in 1971, it had happened again, with the 26th amendment's reversal of the Court's confused decision in [[https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/400/112|Oregon v. Mitchell]] (1970).
-Not surprisingly, therefore, in 1974 the Indiana legislature passed an Article V application for a convention to propose an amendment to overrule //Roe//. Missouri joined the following year, and Louisiana in 1976. The campaign picked up steam, and [[http://article5library.org/analyze.php?topic=Right+to+life&res=1&gen=0&ylimit=0|by the time Burger wrote the first of his three letters, 19 of the necessary 34 states had adopted applications to overrule ]][[http://article5library.org/analyze.php?topic=Right+to+life&res=1&gen=0&ylimit=0|Roe]][[http://article5library.org/analyze.php?topic=Right+to+life&res=1&gen=0&ylimit=0| in various ways.]] So you can understand why the Chief Justice was nervous.
+Not surprisingly, therefore, in 1974 the Indiana legislature passed an Article V application for a convention to propose an amendment to overrule //Roe//. Missouri joined the following year, and Louisiana in 1976. The campaign picked up steam, and [[http://article5library.org/analyze.php?topic=Right+to+life&res=1&gen=0&ylimit=0|by the time Burger wrote the first of his three letters, 19 of the necessary 34 states had adopted applications to overrule Roe in various ways.]] So you can understand why the Chief Justice was nervous.
 But here's the ultimate irony: During the 1990s, the leadership of a few deeply conservative groups launched a campaign to rescind all Article V applications. They exhorted their grassroots members to lobby state legislatures, and in some cases they did win rescission.