How The Supreme Court Killed Roe v. Wade

This is an ocean change at the Supreme Court. β›‘ Tab for a Cause just launched Tab for Reproductive Health that will raise money for reproductive rights

Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.
πŸš€ Extended & ad-free versions on Nebula/CuriosityStream!
πŸ‘” Suits by Indochino!

Send me an email:

Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school!
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you!

Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images and AP Archives
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by (
Maps provided by MapTiler/Geolayers


  1. I’m well aware this will not apply in all cases (rp/nst) but shouldn’t this all start with responsible sexually activity?
    I also do not understand those who are boycotting sexual activity because of this ruling. It seems illogical given there are measures people take to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

  2. Sigmund Hoenigsberg

    It wasn’t an amendment, then it ain’t a “constitutional” right, maybe a “federal” rule, but only sustained by a court ruling.

  3. Have you been offered a television show, or a spot on one? I’m a huge fan 🀦🏻, your analysis always considers that many of us use you as an educational resource and needed explanations are generally clear and useful. I also appreciate the way you step around rabbit holes even though we know you could give a great tour. Just a thought, although looking at your subscription numbers, you have a huge audience here. Just a thought, I know lawyering doesn’t pay much. 🧐

  4. The question in my mind for many of these types of cases, is why the court acts like the 14th amendment effectively repeals the 10th. The fact that the historical evidence is so conflicted would seem to indicate the wisest course would be to permit the states to address the issue based on the beliefs of their citizens.

  5. The crux of this issue is whether or not an unborn child is life or not. If unborn children are life then they have rights and this is murder. If they are not life but instead potential life, then they have no rights. Overturning Roe was the right call because it allows red states to enact laws based on their belief that unborn children are life and blue states can enact laws based on their beliefs. I wish people could all be on the same page, but like with most issues at the moment, people believe competing and opposite views. I’m not going to say who I think who is right here, however, I will say that Americans are so greatly divided at this point (mainly by media personalities who are pushing specific agendas to the point where they ignore the facts of actual events in favor of their interpretation of the events) that something is going to break. This might be the start.

  6. Coming soon: “Same-sex marriage affects potential human life because marriage is about making babies, and since same-sex couples can’t have babies it is preventing a potential life. Therefore laws protecting same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.” (Though perhaps the wording would be more formal…)

  7. Daniel Callahan

    I love your movie videos! Could you watch and lawyer the psychological thriller “Law Abiding Citizen (2009)”? That’s a film loaded with laws broken!

  8. the supreme court straight up took over the country and the dems are doing nothing against it, republicans just took over without a majority in congress or the presidency, until democrats actually decide to do shit instead of fundraising, the country will be coming closer and closer to the christian nationalist ideal which is pretty damn close to fascism

  9. Giveme TheDaily

    WHY do you want 9 people to be the ones who tell you you have or don’t have a right? Look at how they have gutted the 2nd Amendment, “No right is absolute”, so even if you say its a right, what is “common sense abortion control”? A birthing person can do what they want, within reason (drug laws anyone?), but what about the person who is inside the first? When does a fetus become a person, birth? Then no more murder charges for hitting a birthing person in the stomach that ends a life. Sperm providing persons have no say in this process, how is that just? Three people are involved in a pregnancy (usually), but only one has a say? All SCOTUS did was give the states the right to implement “common sense abortion control.” Don’t think you state is right, vote or move. You don’t want the middle states telling you what to do? They don’t like that either, but that doesn’t stop “common sense gun control” does it. Lets figure out how to make a right “absolute”, then lets agree that states determine what people do in that state and we don’t let one state try to force another to do anything (yeah speed limits was an example of this BS of feds telling states what to do with $). But this whole “Abortion is a right” listed no where, and “Keep and Bear Arms” “Shall NOT” doesn’t mean what it litterally says is crap. You do what you want with your body, now lets talk about the child that gets sucked out of a uterus, okay? What about their body?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.