1. Summarization of the holding in Roe v. Wade.
The court does not authorize a direct appeal when there is the pursuit of only declaratory relief. The court does review the case, on appeal, because there is no reason not to if the seeking of relief when the case is properly before the Court on appeal from specific denial of injunctive relief and the arguments as to both injunctive and declaratory relief are necessarily identical (Mason and Stephenson, p. 578) Contrary to appellee's contention, the natural termination of Roe's pregnancy did not moot her suit.
The court suggests in its holding that the complaint The Does' complaint, based as it is on contingencies, any one or more of which may not occur, is too speculative to present an actual case or controversy. (Mason and Stephenson, p. 573)
Another holding is that the state does not have authority over the women's right to make decision about her own body.
State criminal abortion laws protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. The State cannot override that right. (Mason and Stephenson, p. 574)
While -the State has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the "potentiality of human life", each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. The court organizes the information according to the trimester of the examined pregnancy:
For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.
For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.
For the stage subsequent to viability the ...