Roe of Roe v. Wade Files to Overturn U.S. Abortion Case

“Norma McCorvey, the woman whose 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case helped make abortion legal in the United States, today petitioned to overturn the historic Roe v. Wade decision. Known for years as just Jane Roe, McCorvey (pictured right) filed the below affidavit in support of a motion in U.S. District Court in Dallas. McCorvey, 55, stated that the landmark case ‘was built upon false assumptions’ and had ’caused great harm to the women and children of our nation.’ McCorvey, who has been stridently pro-life for nearly 10 years, noted that when she filed her original lawsuit 30 years ago, she was unsure of what the term ‘abortion’ even meant…” —Roe of Roe v. Wade Files to Overturn U.S. Abortion Case (The Smoking Gun)

Just now, I searched Planned Parenthood’s website for “McCorvey,” but found nothing. While it’s understandable that there might not yet be an official response to this breaking news, I find it strange that her name appears nowhere on the site. “Roe” appears 88 times, however, and there is a link to ““. But here is an intriguing snippet from McCorvey’s website, ““, which may explain why Planned Parenthood would prefer to act as if the real woman behind Roe didn’t exist:

In 1995, Norma was baptized and gave her life to God. She literally moved next door from the abortion clinic at which she was working to the national offices of the prominent pro-life organization, Operation Rescue. Later, feeling a need to share her personal message, Norma founded Roe No More Ministry in 1997 with the mission of exposing the lie that is Roe v. Wade.

See older blurbs about abortion language in journalism and abortion on the NOW web site. Pro-choice groups have been fairly successful at promoting language that decreases the gradient between the statements “I am pro-life” and “I am an evil bomber of women’s health centers”. But now that terrorism is much more a part of the daily lives of Americans, I wonder whether the same rhetoric will work, especially when building an argument against a former clinic worker.

Update, 20 May: Federal court to Roe: No.