Due Process—to a judicially constructed right—abortion?

Please address each of the following two (2) prompts. Make sure that your responses are succinct and clear, and that they cover each part of each prompt. Each response should be between three and four pages in length—a total of six to eight pages, double-spaced with one-inch margins all around.
Cite (any style) where appropriate, and include a bibliography of works cited on an additional page; use either Times New Roman or Calibri font (choose just one) 11 or 12-point (font size). Submit your work via Canvas any time prior to 2:30 pm, Tuesday the 15th of March, 2022. Late work will not be accepted.
Address each of the following prompts:
In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court recognized a “fundamental ‘right to privacy’ that protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose whether or not to have an abortion.” Yet, that right to choose is not absolute, as it rests on the viability of the fetus. Thus, the Court found a balance between the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment—protecting a fundamental right to privacy (and thus the “right to choose”)—and the government’s interest in protecting both a woman’s health and prenatal life (justices have also found and noted a connection between privacy and the First, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments). As the Constitution does not explicitly state that individuals (women) have a right to abortions, did the Court both trample on the rights of the states to legislate that which is not an enumerated power of the federal government, and also extend an existing right—Due Process—to a judicially constructed right—abortion?
Use the IRAC method of legal analysis to reason a decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (LII’s analysis of the case can be found on Canvas as reading “Week 10.14…”). Use precedent to decide the case. Where conflicting case law exists, use sound legal reasoning, as do our justices, to structure your argument on the precedent(s) that you deem most foundational to that part of the Constitution you judge most relevant to the case. In addition to the precedents we reviewed during lecture: Griswold v. Connecticut; United States v. Vuitch; Eisenstadt v. Baird; Roe v. Wade; Doe v. Bolton; Bellotti v. Baird; Harris v. McRae; and, City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, you may also cite (but, are not required to cite or even review) Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986); Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989); Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990); Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992); Stenberg v. Carhart (2000); Gonzales v. Carhart and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (2007).

Calculate your order
Pages (275 words)
Standard price: $0.00
Client Reviews
Our Guarantees
100% Confidentiality
Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.
Original Writing
We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.
Timely Delivery
No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.
Money Back
If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.
Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.