As always, you can find the Dobbs v. Jackson decision here.

Paragraph 5 of 6

Sentence 2 of 2

The next sentence:

“By the end of the 1950s, according to the Roe Court’s own count, statutes in all but four States and the District of Columbia prohibited abortion ‘however and whenever performed, unless done to save or preserve the life of the mother.’ 410 U.S., at 139.35”

It’s just one claim, and since the claim is just “Roe says X,” I’m going to look into it. I’m tired of just blowing past these.

Let’s see what’s in end note 35:

“The statutes of three States (Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) prohibited abortions performed ‘unlawfully’ or ‘without lawful justification.’ Roe, 410 U.S., at 139 (internal quotation marks omitted). In Massachusetts, case law held that abortion was allowed when, according to the judgment of physicians in the relevant community, the procedure was necessary to preserve the woman’s life or her physical or emotional health. Commonwealth v. Wheeler, 315 Mass. 394, 395, 53 N.E. 2d 4, 5 (1944). In the other two States, however, there is no clear support in case law for the proposition that abortion was lawful where the mother’s life was not at risk. See State v. Brandenberg, 137 N.J.L. 124, 58 A. 2d 709 (1948);Commonwealth v. Trombetta, 131 Pa. Super. 487, 200 A. 107 (1938).Statutes in the two remaining jurisdictions (the District of Columbia and Alabama) permitted ‘abortion to preserve the mother’s health.’ Roe, 410 U.S., at 139. Case law in those jurisdictions does not clarify the breadth of these exceptions.

Ugh. Okay, forget it. We’ll deal with this later. Undetermined:

• “By the end of the 1950s, according to the Roe Court’s own count, statutes in all but four States and the District of Columbia prohibited abortion ‘however and whenever performed, unless done to save or preserve the life of the mother.’