One of the few religiously oriented briefs wassubmitted on behalf of Catholic Bishop AustinVaughn of New York. The first half of the documenttraces the first 1400 years of Christianity andthe Catholic Church's position on abortion, saysattorney Robert L. Sassone, its author. "Thesecond half contains other religious arguments,"he adds.
The attachment of a moral value to the fetusbecame a central argument against the legalizationof abortion in the 1960s and 1970s. "The notion ofwhat a fetus is...is a variable concept,"Walkowitz says.
The historians' brief argues that "a statecannot constitutionally justify the imposition of[burdens on the equality and liberty of women] byadopting one, highly-contested, metaphysicalconcept of the value of fetal life."
The turnout and diversity of the pro-choicebriefs is unusual, says Walkowitz. "There are anumber of groups not traditionally interested whohave taken an interest and come forward on thepro-choice issue."
The record number of signatures on thehistorians' brief has astounded many onlookers.
"There have been instances where historianshave tried to help the Court," says Law. "Butnothing on this scale."
Walkowitz says there has never been anamicus brief signed by so many historians,"even in Civil Rights cases."
The brief elicited financial as well asprofessional support from historians, most of whomare associated with universities and historicalassociations around the country.
The American Civil Liberties Union and thePlanned Parenthood Federation of Americacoordinated and funded 31 pro-choice briefs, buthistorians supplied donations so that "ouramicus brief just about covered its owncosts," says Walkowitz.
Sixteen professors from both Michigan andPrinceton, and 12 from Columbia, signed thestatement. Law attributed the relative lack ofsupport from Harvard professors to "short notice"and the absence of a contact at the University. "Iwas a little disappointed in Harvard," she said.
Another brief, formulated by lawyers, arguesthat women's right to abortion is key to the"liberty, privacy and equality historicallyaffirmed" by the Court. Professor of Law Frank I.Michelman co-authored the brief, signed by 15percent of the nation's law professors.
While that brief argues that the democraticprocess is compromised by restricting abortionbecause it violates women's Civil Rights,anti-abortionists say legalization is also aninfringement.
"The people have had no access to being able torestrict abortion," says Carroll. "The Court hasusurped all power in this area. It's time to turnthe issue back to the people."