Maher v. Roe
Case Date: 01/11/1977
Docket No: none
|
In the wake of Roe v. Wade, the Connecticut Welfare Department issued regulations limiting state Medicaid benefits for first-trimester abortions to those that were "medically necessary." An indigent woman ("Susan Roe") challenged the regulations and sued Edward Maher, the Commissioner of Social Services in Connecticut. QuestionDid the Connecticut law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Argument Maher v. Roe - Oral ArgumentFull Transcript Text Download MP3Maher v. Roe - Opinion Announcement Download MP3 Conclusion Decision: 6 votes for Maher, 3 vote(s) against Legal provision: Equal ProtectionIn a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the Connecticut law placed no obstacles in the pregnant woman's path to an abortion, and that it did not "impinge upon the fundamental right recognized in Roe." The Court noted that there was a distinction between direct state interference with a protected activity and "state encouragement of alternative activity consonant with legislative policy." Holding that financial need alone did not identify a suspect class under the Equal Protection Clause, the Court found that the law was "rationally related" to a legitimate state interest and survived scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment. |