Summary

THE US SUPREME COURT HEARD ARGUMENTS ON A MISSOURI LAW THAT PUT RESTRICTED THE USE OF STATE FUNDS FACILITIES, AND EMPLOYEES IN PERFORMING, ASSISTING WITH OR COUNSELING FOR ABORTIONS PRO CHOICE FORCES HAD CONTENDED THIS WAY FORBIDDEN BY THE ROE V WADE DECISION

Source CONUS Archive
Record ID 118825
Story Slug SCOTUS / ROE V WADE IMPACT (1989)
Location WASHINGTON, DC
Format NAT
Date 04/26/1989
Archive Time 12:40:59
TRT 1:50
Supers 1) DRAWINGS BY: BILL HENNESSEY 2) FRANK SUSMAN, PRO-CHOICE LAWYER 3) WILLIAM WEBSTER, MO ATTORNEY GENERAL 4) MIKE MCKEE, RPTG
Video Description TWO WOMEN (ONE THE ORIGINAL “ROE” OF THE DECISION)WALKING UP STEPS AND INTO SUPREME COURT BUILDING, WIDE OF BUILDING, COURT SKETCHES, PULL FROM SUPREME COURT BUILDING TO PRO CHOICE DEMONSTRATORS IN FRONT MARCHING AND CHANTING, ANTI ABORTION DEMONSTRATORS, PHOTO OF SUPREME COURT MEMBERS, NEWS CONFERENCE FOLLOWING DECISION, SOTs, CUTAWAYS
Description THE US SUPREME COURT HEARD ARGUMENTS ON A MISSOURI LAW THAT PUT RESTRICTED THE USE OF STATE FUNDS FACILITIES, AND EMPLOYEES IN PERFORMING, ASSISTING WITH OR COUNSELING FOR ABORTIONS PRO CHOICE FORCES HAD CONTENDED THIS WAY FORBIDDEN BY THE ROE V WADE DECISION
Not everything listed in the CONUS Archive is necessarily licensable Reporter sound/image is not licensable

Keywords

ABORTION RIGHTS
ROE V. WADE
ROE VERSUS WADE
SCOTUS
SUPREME COURT
MISSOURI
WEBSTER V. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES
WEBSTER VERSUS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES
STATE FUNDING
}