Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:21:31.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Framing of a Right to Choose: Roe v. Wade and the Changing Debate on Abortion Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2010

Mary Ziegler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, arguably the most hotly debated in recent decades, has produced an impressive body of historical scholarship. The leading histories have focused on the evolution of the arguments and alliances that shape abortion debate today, rights-based prolife and pro-choice arguments, alliances between women's rights leaders and public health advocates, and the adoption of pro-choice positions by the Democratic Party and pro-life positions by the Republicans. This orientation is unquestionably a sensible one; rights-based arguments, in play before Roe, have come to dominate the debate after the decision. However, by emphasizing rights-based debate before the decision, the current scholarship has mostly missed a significant change in the rhetoric and coalitions on either side of the debate that was partly produced by Roe itself.

Type
Articles
Information
Law and History Review , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , Summer 2009 , pp. 281 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See, e.g., Garrow, David J., Liberty and Sexuality: The Right to Privacy and the Making of Roe v. Wade (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998)Google Scholar; Condit, Celeste Michelle, Decoding Abortion Rhetoric: Communicating Social Change (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1990)Google Scholar; Reagan, Leslie, When Abortion Was a Crime: Women, Medicine, and Law in the United States (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Gorney, Cynthia, Articles of Faith: A Frontline History of the Abortion Wars (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1998)Google Scholar.

2. Reagan has studied how the strength of the abortion legalization or reform movements depended on the ability of ordinary women to achieve independence and power over their own lives. See, e.g., Reagan, , When Abortion Was a Crime. 18Google Scholar. Condit, by contrast, has studied the development of pro-life and pro-choice rhetoric and the ultimate compromise between pro-life and pro-choice positions, a compromise that framed abortion as “a woman's choice but also as an undesirable moral act.” See Condit, , Decoding Abortion, 199Google Scholar. Garrow, in turn, has examined the work of the litigators and courts responsible for the Supreme Court's decision in Roe. See Garrow, , Liberty and Sexuality, ix–xGoogle Scholar.

3. The best-known scholarship on Roe and the Court's ability to produce social change questions the wisdom of Supreme Court decisions about politically controversial matters and argues that those decisions may trigger backlashes against the result announced by the Court. See Klarman, Michael, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality (Oxford, England; New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar; Rosenberg, Gerald N., The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991)Google Scholar. Reva Siegel and Robert Post have recently argued that these backlash theorists oversimplify the effects of political backlashes generated by influential court decisions. See Siegel, Reva and Post, Robert, “Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash,” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Review 42 (2007): 373–75Google Scholar. Siegel and Post see backlash as an important part of democratic constitutionalism, “an exchange between officials and citizens over constitutional meaning.” “Roe Rage,” 379. In the view of Siegel and Post, backlash is a natural feature of a constitutional system in which judges must balance the need for respect for the rule of law with a desire to create democratically legitimate decisions. “Roe Rage,” 374–75.

4. For examples of pre-Roe discussions of the public health problems connected to illegal abortion, see generally Calderone, Mary S., “Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem,” American Journal of Public Health 50 (July 1960): 948–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Abortion: Legal and Illegal; A Dialogue Between Attorneys and Psychiatrists, ed. Kummer, Jerome M. (Santa Monica: J. M. Kummer, 1967)Google Scholar.

5. Mark Graber has studied the gradual adoption of pro-choice norms and rhetoric by the Democratic Party in the 1980s and the effect of that decision on American politics. See Graber, Mark A., Rethinking Abortion: Equal Choice, the Constitution, and Reproductive Choice (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 137–53Google Scholar.

6. Gordon Silverstein has studied the ways in which law has increasingly been seen as a substitute or model for the political process and thereby has influenced the ways in which some political issues have been discussed. See Silverstein, Gordon, Law's Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, Saves and Kills Politics (New York; Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 3–8Google Scholar.

7. See Klemesrud, Judy, “Sterilization Is Answer For Many,” New York Times, January 18, 1971, 24Google Scholar.

8. The Human Betterment Foundation was founded in 1929 in order to study the psychological, physical, and sexual effects of compulsory eugenic sterilization. For an example of the research conducted and published by Human Betterment, see Popenoe, Paul, “Success on Parole After Sterilization,” in Collected Papers on Eugenic Sterilization in California: A Critical Study of the Results of 6000 Cases (Pasadena: The Human Betterment Foundation, 1930), 18Google Scholar.

9. See Galton, Francis, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development (London: Macmillan, 1883), 24CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. See Willrich, Michael, “The Two Percent Solution: Eugenic Jurisprudence and the Socialization of American Law, 1900–1930,” Law and History Review 16 (1998): 67–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. See, e.g., Jenks, Albert Ernest, “The Legal Status of Negro-White Amalgamation in the United States,” American Journal of Sociology 21 (1916): 666CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Plecker, W. A., “The New Family and Race Improvement,” Virginia Health Bulletin 17 (1925): 30–31Google Scholar.

12. For a contemporary study of compulsory sterilization laws, see Landman, J. H., Human Sterilization (New York: Macmillan, 1932)Google Scholar.

13. “Gallup Poll,” Gallup News Service, January 17, 1937Google Scholar.

14. See Ladd-Taylor, Molly, “Eugenics, Sterilization and Modern Marriage in the USA: The Strange Career of Paul Popenoe,” Gender and History 13 (2001): 298CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. Valone, David, “Eugenic Science in California: The Papers of E. H. Gosney and the Human Betterment Foundation,” The Mendel Newsletter: Archival Resources for the History of Genetics and Allied Sciences, New Series No. 5 (Febrauary 1996): 13–15Google Scholar.

16. See Ibid.

17. See Ruth Proskauer Smith, President of the Human Betterment Association of America, to Senator John F. Kennedy (May 4, 1959), in The Ruth Proskauer Smith Papers, 77-M164, Carton 1, Folder 5, Schlesinger Library, Harvard University.

18. Ibid.

19. Smith hired a publicity agency to help Human Betterment reform its image and was advised to emphasize that all sterilizations carried out by the organization were voluntary. Cass Canfield, Chairman of the Editorial Board of Harper Brothers Publishing, to Hugh Moore (December 10, 1959), in The Hugh Moore Papers, MC 153, Box 15, Folder 10, Seeley Mudd Manuscript Library, Princeton University.

20. See Ibid.

21. Hugh Moore to Ruth Proskauer Smith (October 19, 1962), in The Hugh Moore Papers, MC 153, Box 15, Folder 6.

22. Hugh Moore, Speech Made in Acceptance of Position as President of the Human Betterment Association for Voluntary Sterilization (November 20, 1964), in Ibid.

23. See Ibid.

24. “Clinic Defended on Sterilization,” New York Times, October 7, 1962, A1Google Scholar.

25. See Ibid.

26. See note 22.

27. Moore, Hugh, The Population Bomb (December 1959), 14Google Scholar, in The Hugh Moore Papers, MC 153, Box 20, Folder 5.

28. In Moore's 1966 pamphlet, Famine Stalks the Earth, he argued that “hunger brings turmoil, and as we have learned, creates the atmosphere in which the communists seek to conquer the earth.” See Eager, Paige Whaley, Global Population Policy: From Population Control to Reproductive Rights (Aldershot, Hants, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2004), 94, note 26Google Scholar.

29. Hugh Moore to John Rague et al., Memorandum (April 25, 1967), in The Hugh Moore Papers, MC 153, Box 15, Folder 7.

30. Ibid., 2.

31. Ibid.

32. AVS Budget (April 1967), in Ibid.

33. Hugh Moore to the Board of Directors of the Human Betterment Association for Voluntary Sterilization (October 5, 1966), in Ibid.

34. Webster, Bayard, “Overpopulation Unites 2 Groups,” New York Times, October 2, 1969Google Scholar.

49. AVS leaders told the press that the National Conference on Conservation and Voluntary Sterilization, held in the fall of 1969, was meant to show the role of “voluntary sterilization as a major solution to family and population problems.” Ibid.

35. See, e.g., Graham, Ellen, “Vasectomies Increase as Concern Over ‘Pill,’ Overpopulation Grows,” Wall Street Journal, November 11, 1970, 1Google Scholar.

36. See, e.g., “Mother of 10 Sues Over Sterilization,” New York Times, Febrauary 10, 1971, 71Google Scholar; Carmody, Deborah, “Hospital Shifts on Sterilization,” New York Times, July 4, 1970, 18Google Scholar.

37. See above, e.g., note 36, “Mother of Ten.”

38. Kohlmeier, Louis, “In '72, U.S. Financed 100,000 Sterilizations,” Chicago Tribune, December 2, 1973, A12Google Scholar.

39. See Executive Director's Progress Report, in The Association for Voluntary Sterilization Records, Box RC 110, Folder 21, Social Welfare History Archives, University of Minnesota.

40. Rockefeller, John D., “On the Origins of Population Control,” Population and Development Review 3 (December 1977): 493CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For an example of Osborn's writings while he was serving as president of both organizations, see Osborn, Frederick, “Population Problems and the American Eugenics Society,” Science, May 1954, 3AGoogle Scholar.

41. Rockefeller, , “Population Control,” 496Google Scholar.

42. Ibid.

43. Ibid.

44. Ibid., 494.

45. Ibid., 498.

46. Ibid., 499.

47. See below, notes 50–51.

48. Myler, Joseph L., “Scientists Call for Curbs on Population Growth,” Washington Post, April 18, 1963, E2Google Scholar.

49. Brody, Jane, “Population Group Offers Care Plan,” New York Times, April 20, 1971, 36Google Scholar.

50. “Tunisia Puts Hope in Birth Control,” New York Times, December 27, 1964, 21Google Scholar. For an example of a similar program, see Topping, Seymour, “Taiwan Program Curbs Births, Contraceptive Loops Praised,” New York Times, June 13, 1965, 10Google Scholar.

51. See above, note 50, “Tunisia Puts Hope,” 21.

52. See Ibid.

53. See above, note 49, Brody, , “Population Group Offers Care Plan,” 36Google Scholar.

54. Ibid.

55. “Population Student,” New York Times, March 17, 1969, 27Google Scholar.

56. See above, note 1, Garrow, , Liberty and Sexuality, 341Google Scholar; “Legal Abortions Are Topic of Study,” Washington Post, January 6, 1972, A7Google Scholar; Brody, Jane, “Study Finds as Legal Abortions Rise, Safer Procedures Are Sought More,” New York Times, June 8, 1972, 53Google Scholar.

57. See above, note 56, Brody, , “Study Finds,” 53Google Scholar.

58. Johnston, Laurie, “Nationwide Drive for Abortion Planned Parenthood in 3-Day Session Here,” New York Times, July 20, 1971, 30Google Scholar.

59. Ibid.

60. Ibid.

61. Ibid.

62. See Ibid.

63. Ibid.

64. See, e.g., “The Abortion Report,” Chicago Tribune, March 20, 1972, 20Google Scholar.

65. The Report stated that “there is little doubt that legal and illegal abortions exert a downward influence on the United States birthrate.” See Population and the American Future: The Report of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (New York: New American Library, 1972), 85–89Google Scholar.

66. See above, note 64, “The Abortion Report,” 20.

67. Ibid.

68. See Cimons, Marlene, “Women's Caucus Will Offer Strong Rights Plank to GOP,” Los Angeles Times, August 16, 1972, H3Google Scholar.

69. Thimmesch, Nick, “Abortion and the 1972 Presidential Race,” Chicago Tribune, July 25, 1971, A5Google Scholar.

70. See Ibid.

71. Ripton, Ray, “Fear for Environment Reaches Grass Roots,” Los Angeles Times, Febrauary 15, 1970, WS1Google Scholar.

72. Ehrlich promoted “involuntary” population control measures, including the elimination of aid to countries with growing populations and the introduction of luxury taxes on items like diapers. See “Dr. Guttmacher Is Evangelist of Birth Control,” New York Times, Febrauary 9, 1969, SM32Google Scholar.

73. See “Forum Set on Abortion,” Hartford Courant, April 9, 1969, 10BGoogle Scholar.

74. See above, e.g., note 71, Ripton, “Fear for Environment,” WS1 (describing operation of UCLA branch); “Campus Meeting Scheduled on Over Population,” Hartford Courant, March 4, 1970, 14D (describing formation of ZPG unit at Eastern Connecticut College)Google Scholar; “Group Forms to Quell Population,” Los Angeles Times, July 18, 1970, 56 (formation of Caltech unit)Google Scholar; “Zero Population Unit Seeks Va. Legislation,” Washington Post, May 12, 1971, B13 (formation of University of Virginia branch)Google Scholar.

75. See above, note 71, Ripton, “Fear for Environment,” WS1.

76. See Ibid.

77. See Ibid.

78. Ibid.

79. Landesfield, Jill, “Overpopulation Adherent,” Los Angeles Times, October 26, 1970, 566 (describing Barnett's position)Google Scholar; Klemesrud, Judy, “To Them Two Children Are Fine, But Three Crowd The World,” New York Times, June 12, 1971, 30 (relating the views of several members of ZPG New York)Google Scholar.

80. See, e.g., Barnett, Kit, “Where Have All the Shrinking Violets Gone,” Chicago Tribune, May 17, 1970, W4 (describing the participation of Illinois branch of ZPG in a pro-legalization rally)Google Scholar; Johnson, Elaine, “Abortion Law Repeal Pondered at Parley,” Hartford Courant, January 17, 1971, 9A (describing participation of state-level ZPG affiliate in discussion about repeal of all abortion bans)Google Scholar.

81. See, e.g., Ibid.

82. See, above, e.g., note 71, Ripton, “Fear for Environment,” WS1.

83. “Teacher Sues Over Vasectomy Refusal in Sterilization Test,” Los Angeles Times, December 1, 1971, A3Google Scholar.

84. Ibid.

85. See, e.g., “Blacks Say Control of Births Is a Plot,” Hartford Courant, November 19, 1972, 29Google Scholar.

86. See above, note 79, Klemesrud, , “To Them,” 30Google Scholar.

87. Schwartz, Harry, “The Fear that Birth Control May Mean Genocide,” New York Times, May 2, 1971, E7Google Scholar.

89. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 117–19 (1973)Google Scholar.

90. Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 182–84 (1973)Google Scholar.

91. Ibid., 184–85.

92. Roe v. Wade, Conference of December 16, 1971Google Scholar, in The William O. Douglas Papers, Box 104, Folder 1, Library of Congress; Doe v. Bolton, Conference of December 16, 1971Google Scholar, in Ibid.

93. Doe v. Bolton, Conference

94. Ibid.

95. Ibid..

96. Ibid.

97. See Ibid.

98. Roe, 164–65; Doe, 194–95, 198.

99. Roe, 140–48. In Doe, the Court set aside several provisions of the Georgia statute on fourteenth-amendment grounds, including requirements that abortions be performed in an accredited hospital, be authorized by a committee of physicians, and be approved by two physicians and a consulting doctor. See Doe, 194–95, 198.

100. Roe, 150–51.

101. Ibid., 153.

102. Ibid.

103. Ibid., 158.

104. Ibid., 164–65.

105. Ibid., 164.

106. See, e.g., Elsasser, Glen, “Top Court Strikes Down Abortion Laws,” Chicago Tribune, January 23, 1973, 1Google Scholar; MacKenzie, John P., “Supreme Court Allows Early Stage Abortions,” Washington Post, January 23, 1973, A1Google Scholar. The New York Times praised the Roe Court for making “a major contribution to the preservation of individual liberties and free decision-making.” See “Respect for Privacy,” New York Times, January 24, 1973, 40Google Scholar. Similarly, the Los Angeles Times called Roe “a sensible decision, persuasive both in its historical and legal arguments.” See “Abortions and the Right of Privacy,” Los Angeles Times, January 23, 1973, C6Google Scholar.

107. See below, notes 259, 265.

108. Roe, 153, 164–65.

109. Stewart, Patricia, “‘Victory,’ ‘Slaughter,’ Claimed,” Hartford Courant, January 23, 1973, 1AGoogle Scholar.

110. Ibid.; Wolfe, Sheila, “Breakthrough or Tragedy,” Chicago Tribune, January 23, 1973, 4Google Scholar.

111. See above, note 7, Klemesrud, , “Sterilization Is Answer,” 24Google Scholar.

112. See, e.g., “Va. Mother Sues Over Sterilization,” Washington Post, June 18, 1978Google Scholar, C2 (test cases); Westoff, Leslie Aldridge, “Sterilization,” New York Times, September 29, 1974, 259 (advertising)Google Scholar.

113. Brozan, Nadine, “The Volatile Issue of Sterilization Abuse,” New York Times, December 9, 1977, B10Google Scholar.

114. Ibid.

115. Ibid.; Bartlett, Kay, “Moral, Legal Dilemmas Surround Use of Sterilization,” Chicago Tribune, July 3, 1978, 16Google Scholar.

116. See above, note 115, Bartlett, , “Legal Dilemmas,” 16Google Scholar.

117. Engenderhealth's current website stresses the organization's work in providing “contraception” and “informed choice” in “resource-poor countries.” See Engenderhealth, About Our Work, available at <http://www.engenderhealth.org/our-work> (visited March 3, 2008).

118. Brody, Jane, “Legal Abortions Up 53% Since Court Ruled in '73,” New York Times, Febrauary 3, 1975, 1Google Scholar.

119. The Council joined other organizations in calling on the Carter Administration to provide and fund alternatives to abortion. See Cohn, Victor, “Pregnancy Prevention Plan Proposed,” Washington Post, July 20, 1977, A3Google Scholar. For examples of the Council's post-Roe research, see Claiborne, William, “Pregnancy Held Greater Risk Than Childbirth,” Los Angeles Times, Febrauary 5, 1976, A1Google Scholar; Brody, Jane, “Researchers Seek New Male Contraceptive,” New York Times, Febrauary 21, 1978, 18Google Scholar.

120. Graham, Bradley, “Cutback Urged in Legal Immigration,” Washington Post, July 5, 1974, A6Google Scholar.

121. See above, note 119, Cohn, “Pregnancy Prevention,” A3; Oppenheim, Carol, “Big Zero for Zero Population's Goal,” Chicago Tribune, December 14, 1978, A1Google Scholar.

122. Ibid.

123. Ibid.

124. Ibid.

125. See, e.g., Luker, Kristin, Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood (Berkeley: the University of California Press, 1984), 91Google Scholar; Condit, , Decoding Abortion Rhetoric, 199Google Scholar.

126. Meeting Minutes, Planned Parenthood-World Population Board of Directors (disseminated February 8, 1969), in Planned Parenthood Federation of America I, Box 49, Folder 9, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College.

127. See above, note 1, Garrow, , Liberty and Sexuality, 502Google Scholar.

128. Lilliston, Lyle, “National Group to End Abortion Laws Formed,” Los Angeles Times, Febrauary 18, 1969, E1Google Scholar.

129. Model Penal Code Section 230.3 (American Law Institute proposed official draft 1962).

130. Lader, Larry, “The Scandal of Abortion,” New York Times, April 25, 1965, SM32Google Scholar.

131. See above, note 1, Garrow, , Liberty and Sexuality, 324, 326Google Scholar.

132. Lamm himself would join those who argued that reform was “not only no compromise but is counterproductive.” See Lamm, Dick, “Therapeutic Abortion: The Role of State Government,” Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 14 (December 1971): 1205CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. The explanations for the failure of reform laws emphasized that doctors were still reluctant to perform abortions after the introduction of reform legislation, because they remained afraid of damage to their professional reputations or of legal liability. See, e.g., “Abortion Experts, Saying Women Should Decide on Birth, Ask End to Curbs,” New York Times, November 24, 1965, 77Google Scholar; Plagenz, Larry, “States Legislate Abortion Reform, But Hospitals Are Reluctant to Comply,” Modern Hospital 113 (July 1969): 82–85Google ScholarPubMed. Several commentators reported that it was easier to obtain an abortion in a state that criminalized all abortions than it was in a reform state. See, e.g., McFadden, Robert, “Flaws in Abortion Reform Found in 8 States Studied,” New York Times, April 13, 1970, 1Google Scholar.

133. MacPherson, Myra, “Abortion Laws: A Call for Reform,” Washington Post, Febrauary 17, 1969, D1Google Scholar.

134. Pilpel, Harriet, “The Public and Private Aspects of the Problem,” New York Times, June 14, 1970, 252Google Scholar.

135. Shanahan, Eileen, “Doctor Leads Group's Challenge to Anti-Abortion Law,” New York Times, October 5, 1971, 28Google Scholar.

136. Ibid.

137. The AMA used arguments similar to Nellis's, formally stating that “no physician or medical personnel should be compelled to perform any act which violates his good medical judgment.” See Cooper, Richard, “AMA Relaxes Its Stand on Abortion,” Los Angeles Times, June 26, 1970, 18Google Scholar. After efforts by Catholic members to rescind the organization's endorsement, the AMA solidified its pro-legalization position in December of 1970. See Kotulak, Ronald, “A.M.A. Wins Fight on Eased Abortions,” Chicago Tribune, December 3, 1970, 12Google Scholar.

138. See above, note 1, Garrow, , Liberty and Sexuality, 501Google Scholar.

139. See Robinson, Nan, “Nixon Considers Proposal for a Commission on Domestic Population Reforms,” New York Times, June 11, 1969, 20Google Scholar.

140. Ibid.

141. Ibid.

142. Kohn, Victor, “New Coalition Asks Crusade for Halting Population Growth,” Washington Post, August 11, 1971, A1Google Scholar.

143. See Ferguson, Ernest, “Zero Population Growth Isn't Zero,” Los Angeles Times, January 30, 1972, 17Google Scholar.

144. For an excellent study of Planned Parenthood and the advocacy of birth control reform, see Gordon, Linda, The Moral Property of Women: A History of Birth Control Politics in America (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2002), 281–82Google Scholar.

145. Eders, Richard, “Family Planning Is Goal of Drive,” New York Times, March 20, 1960, 32Google Scholar.

146. “Parenthood Aide,” New York Times, October 27, 1967, 15Google Scholar.

147. See, e.g., Jeannie Rosoff to PP-WP Affiliates, Board, and Committees (October 2, 1964), in Planned Parenthood Federation of America I, Box 49, Folder 9, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College; Donald Strauss, Chairman PP-WP, Statement to the Committee of Resolutions and Platforms of the 1964 Democratic Convention (August 18, 1964), in Ibid.

148. See, e.g., PP-WP Information and Education Department to PP-WP Board Members and Affiliates, “A Top U.S. Government Official Speaks Out on the Latin American Population Explosion” (April 1964), in ibid; Belair, Felix Jr, “Congress Urged to Aid Population Control Abroad,” New York Times, July 31, 1969, 16Google Scholar.

149. Kaplan, Morris, “Abortion and Sterilization Win Support of Planned Parenthood,” New York Times, November 18, 1968, 50Google Scholar.

150. Ibid.

151. Ibid.

152. See above, note 126, Meeting Minutes, 9–10.

153. Ibid. 9.

154. Ibid., 10.

155. Ibid.

156. See above, note 134, Pilpel, “Public and Private,” 252.

157. See above, note 72, “Dr. Guttmacher Is Evangelist,” SM32.

158. Ibid.

159. “Abortion Reform Termed Fantastic,” Hartford Courant, March 31, 1970, 16Google Scholar.

160. Ibid.

161. See, e.g., Planned Parenthood Fact Sheet (1973), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 54, Folder 26, Schlesinger Library, Harvard University; see also “Time to Lobby Your Representative” (April 1974), in Ibid.

162. See above, note 1, Garrow, , Liberty and Sexuality, 502Google Scholar.

163. For an example of the types of materials recommended by Planned Parenthood organizers, see Weisbord, Robert G., Genocide?: Birth Control and the Black American (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1975)Google Scholar.

164. The Denver Conference Memorandum (November 2, 1973), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 8, Planned Parenthood 1973–1974, Schlesinger Library, Harvard University. Subsequent references in the text are to this Memorandum.

165. See, e.g., “Vaughn Urges Business to Assist the Peace Corps,” New York Times, Febrauary 14, 1968, 12Google Scholar.

166. See Ibid. for discussion of Vaughn's ambassadorial appointment, and see “Vaughn Sworn In as Envoy,” New York Times, June 6, 1969, 29Google Scholar.

167. See Cass Canfield of Planned Parenthood-World Population to Bea Blair, Executive Director of NARAL (April 12, 1974), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 8, Planned Parenthood 1975–1976.

168. Ibid.

169. See, e.g., Denise Spalding of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project to Jane Plitt of the NOW National Office (July 12, 1974), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 54, Folder 26.

170. Denise Spalding of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project to Jane Plitt, Executive Director of National NOW (July 13, 1974), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 54, Folder 32.

171. Ibid.

172. See above, note 72.

173. “Senate Votes to Prohibit Spending of Federal Money on Abortions,” Washington Post, September 18, 1974, A2Google Scholar.

174. See below, notes 273–75.

175. Connie Mooney, NARAL State Administrator, to Francine Stein, Administrator of Planned Parenthood-World Population (May 2, 1975), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 8, Planned Parenthood 1975–1976.

176. See, e.g., Lydon, Christopher, “All Candidates Fall Short on Defining the Issues,” New York Times, January 11, 1976, E4Google Scholar.

177. See Lydon, Christopher, “Abortion Is Big Issue in Massachusetts and New Hampshire,” New York Times, Febrauary 9, 1976, 57Google Scholar.

178. See, e.g., Gerber, Alex, “Campaign Brings Some Illogical Fence-Straddling on Abortion,” Los Angeles Times, Febrauary 22, 1976, H1Google Scholar.

179. Vaughn, Jack Hood, “Abortion: It Has No Place in Politics,” Los Angeles Times, March 4, 1976, C7Google Scholar.

180. Ibid.

181. Ibid.

182. See Clymer, Adam, “Senate Vote Forbids Using Federal Funds for Most Abortions,” New York Times, June 30, 1977, 1Google Scholar; Klemesrud, Judy, “Planned Parenthood's New Head Takes a Fighting Stand,” New York Times, Febrauary 3, 1978, A14Google Scholar.

183. See above, note 182, Klemesrud, “Planned Parenthood's New Head,” A14.

184. Ibid.

185. Ibid.

186. See above, e.g., note 133, MacPherson, “Abortion Laws: A Call,” D1.

187. Ibid.

188. Ibid.

189. NARAL National Board of Directors Meeting Minutes (September 28, 1969), 2, in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 1, Board Minutes.

190. Ibid.

191. Ibid.

192. Linda Cisler, Comments on NARAL Board Resolutions (1969), 2, in Ibid.

193. Ibid.

194. See, e.g., Larry Lader to Shirley Radl of Zero Population Growth, Incorporated (August 20, 1970), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, File Box 9, Zero Population Growth.

195. See Shirley Lewis of Zero Population Growth, Incorporated to Lee Giddings, Executive Director of NARAL (April 16, 1971), in Ibid.

196. Lee Giddings to John Rockefeller III (October 29, 1971), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 7, National.

197. Lorraine Cleveland to Charles Westoff (November 2, 1971), in Ibid.

198. Resolution of the NARAL Executive Committee (November 27, 1972), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 42, Folder 1461, Schlesinger Library, Harvard University.

199. See Ibid.

200. NARAL Speaker and Debater's Handbook Excerpt (circa 1972), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 7, Debating the Opposition.

201. Ibid.

202. Ibid.

203. Ibid.

204. NARAL Executive Committee Minutes (February 3, 1973), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 1, Executive Committee Minutes 1973–1974.

205. See, e.g., Margaret Letterman, Editor of Zero Population Growth, Incorporated, National Report, to Lee Giddings (August 28, 1973), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, File Box 9, Zero Population Growth, Incorporated (sharing advice on press conferences); Carl Pope, Executive Director of Zero Population Growth, Incorporated, to Lee Giddings (circa October 1973), in Ibid.; Barbara Ross of Zero Population Growth, Incorporated, to Roxanne Olivo, Executive Director of NARAL (November 1, 1973), in Ibid.

206. See, e.g., Larry Lader and Betty Friedan to Madame Servan-Schreiber (June 19, 1974), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 42, Folder 1461.

207. Lee Giddings to NARAL Board et al. (February 1974), 2, in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 1, Board Minutes 1973–1979.

208. NARAL Meeting Minutes (April 13, 1975), in Ibid.

209. NARAL Board Meeting Minutes (October 10, 1975), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 43, Folder 1462.

210. Executive Director's Annual Report (1974), in Ibid.

211. See Zyda, Joan, “Abortion Rights Leader Argues for a Free Choice for Women,” Chicago Tribune, December 9, 1975, B1Google Scholar.

212. Ibid.

213. See Betty Friedan, Draft of Article Titled “Houston: How the Women's Movement Survived,” in The Betty Friedan Papers 71–62–81-M23, Crate 35, Folder 1182.

214. See Ibid., 4.

215. See Ibid.

216. See, e.g., Rosenfeld, Megan and Curry, Bill, “Women's Conference Passes Abortion, Gay Rights Measures,” Washington Post, November 21, 1977, A1Google Scholar.

217. See above, note 213, Friedan, , “Houston,” 4Google Scholar.

218. See above, note 216, Rosenfeld and Curry, “Women's Conference,” A1.

219. See National Abortion Rights League [NARAL], Legal Abortion: A Speaker's and Debater's Notebook (Washington, D. C.: The League, 1978)Google Scholar.

220. See Ibid., 3, 5, 6, 7–9.

221. Ibid., 29.

222. Ibid., 7.

223. NOW National Organizing Conference Minutes (October 29–30, 1966), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 43, Folder 1544.

224. See Ibid.

225. Minutes of the NOW National Conference (November 18–19, 1967), in 71–62–81- M23, Carton 43, Folder 1553, Schlesinger Library, Harvard University.

226. See Betty Friedan, Report of the President to the NOW National Conference (November 18, 1967), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 43, Folder 1553. The resolution called for “removing contraceptive information and abortion from the penal code.” See above, note 225, Minutes.

227. See above, note 225, Minutes.

228. Friedan, Betty, “Our Revolution Is Unique” (January 15, 1968)Google Scholar, in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 44, Folder 1578.

229. NOW Executive Committee Draft Schedule (May 18, 1971), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 44, Folder 1583.

230. Wilma Scott Heide, President of NOW, Statement in Support of Public Law 91–213, 92d Congress, An Act to Establish a Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (April 15, 1971), in The Wilma Scott Heide Papers, MC 495, Box 11.12, Schlesinger Library, Harvard University.

231. Christopher Tietze to Wilma Scott Heide (November 5, 1970), in The Wilma Scott Heide Papers, MC 495, 14.7.

232. Wilma Scott Heide to NOW Board of Directors et al. (Winter 1970–1971), in Ibid.

233. See above, note 230, Heide, Statement in Support, 3–4.

234. Ibid.

235. Ibid.

236. Wilma Scott Heide to NOW Chapter Presidents, Task Force Coordinators, Board Officers, and Members (January 31, 1972), in Ibid.

237. Wilma Scott Heide to NOW Members (February 19, 1972), in Ibid.

238. See, e.g., Wilma Scott Heide to Meg Letterman of Zero Population Growth, Incorporated (October 10, 1973), in The Betty Friedan Papers, 71–62–81-M23, Carton 44, Folder 1583.

239. Press Conference (August 17, 1973), in The Betty Friedan Papers, Ibid.

240. Ibid.

241. Fundraising Letter (1973), in The Wilma Scott Heide Papers, MC 495, 11.14.

242. Jan Liebman and Ann Scott to NOW State Coordinators (February 1972), in The Wilma Scott Heide Papers, 11.12.

243. Right to Choose Time Line (1974), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 54, Folder 27.

244. Debating the Opposition, NOW Right to Choose Lobbying Kit, in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 54, Folder 26.

245. Ibid.

246. Ibid.

247. Ibid.

248. Ann Scott and Jan Liebman to NOW State Legislative Coordinators (February 15, 1974), in Ibid.

249. Ibid.

250. See above, note 243, Right to Choose Time Line, 1; Jan Liebman and Ann Scott to NOW State and Regional Coordinators (April 17, 1974), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 2, Folder 32.

251. Jeanne Clark and Janice Gleason, Right to Choose Mobilization Program (December 6, 1975), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 3, Folder 15.

252. NOW National Meeting Minutes (December 6–7, 1975), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 3, Folder 12.

253. Press Statement (January 1976), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 30, Folder 8.

254. NOW National Conference Minutes (April 23, 1977), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 24, Folder 27.

255. Reproductive Rights Resolution (April 1977), in The NOW Papers, MC 496, Box 24, Folder 37.

256. Mall, Janice, “About Women,” Los Angeles Times, September 9, 1979, 14Google Scholar.

257. Crittenden, Ann, “A Colloquy on the Sanger Spirit,” New York Times, September 18, 1979, B8Google Scholar.

258. Backlash theorists have ably documented the effects of Roe on religious anti-abortion organizations. See above text accompanying note 3.

259. See, e.g., Ad Hoc Committee on the Defense of Life, Fundraising Letter (October 23, 1973), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 8, Opposition.

260. See, e.g., Ibid.

261. See Staggenborg, Suzanne, “The Consequences of Professionalization and Formalization in the Pro-Choice Movement,” American Sociological Review 53 (1988): 585, 586CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

262. See Reichley, A. James, Religion in American Public Life (Washington, D. C.: Brookings Institution, 1985), 292Google Scholar.

263. See above, e.g., note 259, Ad Hoc Committee on the Defense of Life.

264. See above, e.g., note 164, The Denver Conference Memorandum.

265. Marcia Fields to NARAL (September 23, 1973), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 8, Opposition.

266. See Dian Terry, Edited Policy Statement (April 1975), in The Now Papers, MC 496, Box 54, Folder 26 (explaining the decision of the NOW National Conference to make abortion a national priority); Right to Choose Fundraising Campaign Brochure (Spring 1974), in Ibid.

267. See above, note 266, Terry, Policy Statement.

268. Kohlmeier, Louis, “Women's Lobby vs. Right to Life,” Chicago Tribune, June 3, 1974, 16Google Scholar.

269. The Civic Research Institute, Incorporated, Projected Research Project for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (Spring, 1975), in The NARAL Papers, MC 313, Carton 8, Planned Parenthood 1975–1976.

270. See, e.g., Hyer, Marjorie, “Abortions, Congress, Churches, and Convictions,” Washington Post, January 22, 1974, B1Google Scholar; Milius, Peter, “Rise of Abortion Issue,” Washington Post, September 17, 1976, A1Google Scholar.

271. Herbers, John, “Convention Speech Stirs Foes of Abortion,” New York Times, June 24, 1979, at 16Google Scholar.

272. See above, note 5, Graber, , Rethinking Abortion, 137–53Google Scholar.

273. “Teddy Leads Fight Against Anti-abortion Bill,” Chicago Tribune, April 11, 1975, 15Google Scholar.

274. See Ibid.

275. See above, note 182, Clymer, , “Senate Vote,” 1Google Scholar.

276. “Reactions Mixed to U.S. Birth Plan,” New York Times, July 19, 1969, 9Google Scholar.

277. “Decrease in Blacks Using Birth Control,” Chicago Defender, May 22, 1971, 28Google Scholar.

278. See “Blacks Split on Sex,” Chicago Defender, Febrauary 15, 1971, 1Google Scholar.

279. Lacey, Ted, “Call Welfare Abortions Genocide,” Chicago Defender, Febrauary 4, 1971, 1Google Scholar.

280. See Ibid.

281. A number of recent histories have studied the involvement of African-American and Hispanic women in the women's rights movement and the movement for abortion reform. See, e.g., Springer, Kimberly, Living for the Revolution: Black Feminist Organizations, 1968–1980 (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roth, Benita, Separate Roads to Feminism: Black, Chicano, and White Feminist Movements in America's Second Wave (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

282. See above, note 149, Kaplan, , “Abortion and Sterilization,” 50Google Scholar.

283. See above, note 135, Shanahan, , “Doctor Leads Group's Challenge,” 28Google Scholar.

284. “Genocide Denied in Birth Curbs,” Washington Post, November 14, 1968, A17Google Scholar.

285. MacPherson, Myra, “MDs File Abortion Lawsuit,” Washington Post, September 30, 1969, B1Google Scholar.

286. See, e.g., Sloan, Margaret, “Do Blacks Belong in Women's Lib? Yes!” Chicago Tribune, June 6, 1971, E12Google Scholar; see also Faulkner, Ellen, “From Our Readers,” Chicago Defender, September 28, 1971, 13Google Scholar.

287. See, e.g., Hunt, Leontyne, “Keeping Your Family the Right Size,” Chicago Defender, January 9, 1971, 21Google Scholar.

288. See “Fears of Genocide Among Blacks as Related to Age, Sex, and Region,” American Journal of Public Health 63 (1972): 1029, 1029–34Google Scholar. For further explanation of the “black genocide” theory, see Sloane, R. Bruce and Horvitz, Diana Frank, A General Guide to Abortion (Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers, 1973)Google Scholar; Roper, Brent, Heath, Linda and King, Charles D., “Race Consciousness; A New Guise for Traditionalism?” Sociology and Social Research 62 (1978): 430Google Scholar.

289. See Jackson, Jesse, “Country Preacher,” Chicago Defender, March 24, 1973, 29Google Scholar.

290. McGlory, Robert, “Opens Abortion War,” Chicago Defender, March 21, 1973, 1Google Scholar.

291. Ibid.

292. Ibid.

293. Coombs, Michael and Welch, Susan, “Blacks, Whites, and Attitudes Toward Abortion,” Public Opinion Quarterly 46 (1982): 510CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

294. See Ibid., 512–13.

295. Ibid., 513.

296. Ibid.

297. Ibid., 516.

298. Ibid.

299. See above, note 290, McGlory, , “Opens Abortion War,” 1Google Scholar.

300. See “Jackson the Orator Has Become Jackson the Politician,” Los Angeles Times, November 27, 1983, 1Google Scholar.

301. See Ibid.

302. See Davis, Mike and Sprinker, Michael, eds., Reshaping the US Left: Popular Struggles in the 1980s (New York: Verso, 1988)Google Scholar.