Planned Parenthood Lawyer Describing the Weakening of Roe v. Wade as Supreme Court Doctrine

Speaking of Supreme Court precedent and the cause of human life in the courts, the meaningful success of the Pro-Life movement since the darkest days of Roe v. Wade is now confirmed out of the mouth of one of its strongest adversaries.  In a January issue of The National Law Journal, Roger Evans who has been lead counsel or co-counsel for Planned Parenthood in many of the leading Supreme Court cases explains how much the jurisprudential landscape has changed –- against the abortion provider position -– in the decades since Roe v. Wade:

I think it clear that the courts have weakened the doctrinal protections of this right. Indeed, outside the political context, I think we can no longer refer just to Roe, but must refer to Roe/Casey, recognizing that Planned Parenthood v. Casey changed significantly the judicial analysis applicable to this area of the law. Roe/Casey is characterized by increasing deference to so-called state interests at the expense both of the woman's individual liberty interests and of the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship at least in the context of abortion care.

As Time magazine has recently reported (here), “abortion-rights activists” have been slowly and steadily but almost always losing ever since their victory in Roe v. Wade some forty years ago.  Now is not the time for Pro-Life advocates to lose heart, heed the nay-sayers, and withdraw from the battle, lest we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.