Roe v. Wade consequences

Recently, the LA Times ran an article on the history of the Ro v. Wade decision that laid the ground work for this country's unrestricted abortion laws. It turns out that Justice Harry Blackmun, new to the court, never intended to create abortion on demand. In fact, he planned to announce that specifically in a pres conference. Unfortunately, the decision that was produced was so broad, it affect not only abortion rights but American politics as well.

Blackmun only intended to strike down the draconian Texan law that prevented doctor's from treating their patients by criminalizing all abortions, inclding those intended to save a mother's life.
"He was thinking of this in the medical framework of Rochester, Minn. He imagined abortions would be performed by a family physician or in a hospital," said historian David J. Garrow, the author of a scholarly history of the abortion-rights movement.

The justices did not foresee the full impact of the ruling or the backlash it would set off, said Georgetown University law professor Mark V. Tushnet, who was a clerk for Justice Thurgood Marshall when Roe was decided. They focused on striking down the Texas-type laws that outlawed all abortions, he said.
Much of the blame for this judicial fiasco lies with Chief Justice Waren Burger whose laissez-faire leadership style allowed the greatest act of judicial activism in American history. As the nomination of Judge Roberts winds its way through the Senate's confirmation hearing, we can only hope that he will reign in such legislating from the bench.

Kudos to the LA Times for running such an insightful piece on such as controversial topic.