Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 8 P36 pptx

medical field also claimed that repeated use of the pill could have unknown long-term effects due to its high level of hormones. Several leading organizations, including the American Medical Association, have supported over-the-counter (OTC) access to the morning- after pill. In 2003 an advisory committee to the FDA recommended OTC access to the drug, but the FDA originally rejected this recommenda- tion. After the Center for Reproductive Rights brought a lawsuit related to the FDA’s refusal to allow OTC access, allegations arose that the FDA’s decision was based more on political reasons than scientific reasons. In 2006 the FDA approved OTC access to the morning-after pill for women ages 18 and older. Some religious groups, including the Roman Catholic Church, have continued to protest the sale of the morning-after pill. Moreover, in so me instances, pharmacists have also refused to fill prescriptions for the pill. Beginning in 1999, Wal-Mart refused to stock the pill, which led to protests. Wal-Mart finally reversed its position and began to stock the pill in 2006. Restricting Antiabortion Protests T B he legalization of abortion resulted in the creation of many groups opposed to the medical procedure. Some group s have sought to take away this reproductive right by lobbying Congress and state legislatures, and others have picketed outside clinics that offer abortion services. In the 1990s, groups such as Operation Rescue sought to prevent abortions by organizing mass demonstrations outside clini cs and blockading their entrances, as w ell as confronting and impeding women seeking to enter the clinics. Clinics responded by obtaining court injunctions that restricted how close abortion protestors could get to clinic property. Abortion protestors claimed that these court orders viol ated their First Amend - ment rights of assembly and f ree speech. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Schenck v. Pro- Choice Network of W estern New York, 519 U.S. 357, 117 S. Ct. 855, 137 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1997), clarified what types of restrictions a judge could impo se on abortion clinic protests. The Court upheld an injunction provision that imposed a fixed buffer zone around the abortion clinic. In this case the buffer zone affected protests within 15 feet from either side or edge of, or in front of, doorways or doorway entrances, parking lot entrances, and driveways and driveway entrances. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist ruled that the government had an interest in ensuring public safety an d order, promoting free flow of traffic, p rotecting property rights, and protecting a woman’s freedom to seek pregnancy-related services. The Court did strike down a provision concern- ing floating buffer zones. These zones, which prohibited demonstr ations within 15 feet of any person or vehicle seeking access to or leaving abortion facilities, “burdened more speech than was necessary” to serve the government interests cited in support of fixed zones. Thus, protestors were free to approach persons outside the 15-foot fixed buffer zone. In 2000, though, the Court agai n considered the issue of a buffer zone in Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703, 120 S. Ct. 2480, 147 L. Ed. 2d 597 (2000). The Court upheld Colora do’s 1993 statute, which pre- vented an yone from counseling, distributing leaflets, or displaying signs within eight feet of others without their consent whenever they are within 100 feet of a health-clinic entrance. The Colorado law was en acted, according to attorneys for the state, after abortion patients complaine d of being spat on, kicke d, and harassed outside clinics. Those who challenged the law claimed it was a violation of their freedom of speech under the First Amendment. The court found sufficient public and state interest to uphold the restriction. FURTHER READINGS Briant, Keith. 1962. Marie Stopes: A Biography. London: Hogarth. Korn, Peter. 1996. A Year in the Life of an Abortion Clinic. New York: Grove/Atlantic. CROSS REFERENCES Abortion; Roe v. Wade. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 338 REPRODUCTION Abortion The establishment in Eisenstadt of an indivi- dual’s right to privacy soon had dramatic implications for state laws that criminalized abortions. Until the 1960s, abortion was illegal in every state, except to save the mother’s life. The growth of the modern feminist movem ent in the 1960s led to calls for the legalization of abortion, and many state legislatures began to amend their laws to permit abortion when the pregnancy resulted from a rape or when the child was likely to suffer from a serious birth defect. However, these laws generally required that a committee of doctors approve the abortion. State legislation was swept away with the Supreme Court’s controversial decision in ROE V. WADE, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 (1973). A CLASS ACTION lawsuit challenged the Texas abortion law. SARAH WEDDINGTON, the attorney for “Jane Roe,” argued that the Constitution allows a woman to control her own body, including the decision to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. The Supreme Court, on a 7–2 vote, struck down the Texas law. Justice HARRY A. BLACKMUN, in his majority opinion, relied on the prior right-to-privacy decisions to justify the Court’s action. Blackmun concluded that the right to privacy “is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” More importantly, he stated that the right of privacy is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT. This meant that the state of Texas had to meet the STRICT SCRUTINY test of constitutional review. Texas showed a compelling STATE INTEREST because it had a strong interest in protecting maternal health that justified reasonable state regulation of abortions performed after the first trimester (three months) of pregnancy. How- ever, Texas also sought to proscribe all abor- tions and claimed a compelling STATE INTEREST in protecting unborn human life. Though the Court acknowledged that this was a legitimate interest, it held that it does not become compelling until that point in pregnancy when the fetus becomes “viable,” capable of “mean- ingful life outside the mother’s womb.” Beyond the point of viability, the Court held that the state may prohibit abortion, except in cases in which it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother. The Court rejected the argument that a fetus is a “person” as that term is used in the Constitution and t hus possesses a right t o life. To find a fetus to be a person would make any abortion a HOMICIDE, which would prevent a state from allowing abortions in cases of rape or in which the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother. The Roe decision elicited a hostile reaction from opponents of abortion. The creation of a “pro-life” movement that sought to overturn Roe was immediate, becoming a new fixture in U.S. politics. Pro-life forces sought a CONSTITU- TIONAL AMENDMENT to undo the decision, but it fell one vote short in the U.S. Senate in 1983. Over time, as the composition of the Supreme Court has changed, the Court has modified its views, without overturning Roe. In the 1970s, a majority of the Court resisted efforts by some states to put restrictions on a woman’s right to have an abortion. In Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 96 S. Ct. 2831, 49 L. Ed. 2d 788 (1976), the Court struck down a Missouri law that required minors to obtain the consent of their husbands or parents before obtaining an abortion. In 1979, in Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622, 99 S. Ct. 3035, 61 L. Ed. 2d 797, the Court invalidated a similar Massachu- setts law. Both opinions emphasized the per- sonal nature of abortion decisions and the fact that the state cannot give someone else a VETO over the exercise of one’s constitutional rights. In Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 462 U.S. 416, 103 S. Ct. 2481, 76 L. Ed. 2d 687 (1983), the Court struck down a city ordinance that required that all abortions be performed in hospitals; a twenty-four-hour waiting period pass before an abortion could be performed; certain speci fied statements be made by a doctor to a woman seeking an abortion to ensure that she made a truly informed decision; and all fetal remains be disposed in a humane and sanitary manner. The Court held that these requirements imposed significant burdens on a woman’s exercise of her constitutional right without substantially furthering the state’s legitimate interests. Opponents of abortion were successful, however, in preventing the payment of public funds for abortions not deemed medically necessary. In Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464, 97 S. Ct. 2376, 53 L. Ed. 2d 484 (1977), the Court upheld a Connecticut state regulation that denied MEDICAID benefits to indigent women seeking to have abortions, unless their GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION REPRODUCTION 339 physicians certified that their abortions were medically necessary. The Court found the law permissible because poor women were not a class entitled to strict scrutin y review and because the regulation did not unduly burden the exercise of fundamental rights. In 1980, the Court upheld a provision of federal law, commonly known as the Hyde amendment, forbidding federal funds to support nonthera- peutic abortions (Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297, 100 S. Ct. 2671, 65 L. Ed. 2d 784). During the 1980s and 1990s, the conservative majority on the Court showed more deference to state regulation of abortions. In WEBSTER V. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES, 492 U.S. 490, 109 S. Ct. 3040, 106 L. Ed. 2d 410 (1989), the Court upheld a Missouri law restricting abortions that contained the statement, “the life of each human being begins at conception.” On a 5–4 vote, the Court upheld a law that forbids state employees from performing, assisting in, or counseling women to have abortions. It also prohibited the use of any state facilities for these purposes and required all doctors who would perform abor- tions to conduct viability tests on fetuses at or beyond 20 weeks of gestation. In 1991, the Court upheld federal regula- tions imposed by the Reagan administration that barred birth control clinics that received federal funds from providing information about abortion services to their clients (Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 111 S. Ct. 1759, 114 L. Ed. 2d 233). The Supreme Court found the regulation to be a legitimate condition imposed on the receipt of federal financial assistance. The Court appeared to be ready to overturn the Roe precedent, but it surprised observers when it upheld Roe in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S. Ct. 2791, 120 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1992). The Pennsylvania law restricting abortions required spousal notification, parental consent in cases of minors, and a 24-hour waiting period before the abortion could be performed. The Court had struck down similar requirements before. On a 5–4 vote, the Court reaffirmed the essential holding of Roe that the constitutional right of privacy is broad enough to include a woman’s decision to terminate her pregnancy. Though there was no majority opinion, the controlling opinion by Justice ANTHONY M. KENNEDY,joinedbyJusticesSANDRA DAY O’CONNOR and DAVID H. SOUTER, defended the reasoning of Roe and the line of cases that followed it. However, the joint opinion abandoned the trimester framework and declared a new “undue burden” test for judging regulations of abortion. Using this test, the joint opinion upheld the parental consent, waiting period, and record- keeping and reporting provisions, but it invali- dated the spousal-notification requirement. States have co ntinued to pursue means to control abortions, leading to disputes in the courts. A total of 29 states enacted legislation that banned what is known as a “partial-birth” abortion, which doctors most commonly per- form during the second trimester of a woman’s pregnancy. In Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 120 S. Ct. 2597 (2000), the Court struck down Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion. According to the Court, the statute violated the Constitution in part because the law lacked any exception to protect a woman’s health. Notwithstanding the Court’s decision in Stenberg, Congress in 2003 enacted the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, Pub. L. No. 108-105, 117 Stat. 1201, which contained a ban similar to the Nebraska law. The Supreme Court in 2007 upheld the federal act, ruling that it did not impose an undue burden on a woman’s right to end a pregnancy. The case was especially notable because the two newest members of the Court, Chief Justice JOHN ROBERTS and Justice SAMUEL ALITO, voted in the majority that upheld the act. ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. Number and Outcome of Pregnancies in 2004 SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports, vol. 56, no. 15, April 14, 2008. Live births 4.11 million Induced abortions 1.22 million Fetal losses 1.06 million GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 340 REPRODUCTION Pregnancy and Medical Developments ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION, in vitro fertilization, and embryo transplants have created new opportu- nities for conceiving children. With artificial insemination, sperm from a donor is introduced into the vagina or through the cervix of a woman by any method other than sexual intercourse. Originally this technique was used when a husband was sterile or impotent, but it is now available to women regardless of whether they are married. For example, a lesbian couple could use artificial insemination to start a biological family. The technique of in vitro fertilization gained international attention with the 1978 birth in England of Louise Brown, the first child conceived by in vitro fertilization. This tech- nique involves the fertilization of the egg outside the womb. The embryo is then transferred to a woman’s uterus. Because sperm and eggs can be frozen and stored indefinitely, there are occasional legal disputes over the rights to these genetic materials when a husband and wife divorce. For example, in Kass v. Kass, 696 N.E.2d 174 (N.Y. 1998), the New York Court of Appeals determined that the CUSTODY of five frozen embryos should be determined by the terms of a contract signed by a couple with a hospital that stored the embryos. The couple had sought to become pregnant through in vitro fertilization, but, after several failed attempts, decided to DIVORCE. The HUSBAND AND WIFE initially agreed to the terms of a CONSENT DECREE with the hospital whereby the hospital could retain the right to keep the embryos for research purposes. The wife later changed her mind and wanted custody of the embryos. The court held that the consent agreements constituted valid con- tracts and must be enforced. It ruled that under the terms of the contract, the hospital should be awarded the embryos for use in research. Other courts have considered disputes whereby one spouse wishes to use embryos for the purpose of procreation while the other wants the embryos destroyed. Several state supreme courts have held that the right of a spouse who wishes to avoid procreation is superior to the wishes of spouse who wishes to procreate. In J. B. v. M. B., 783 A.2d 707 (N.J. 2001), for example, the New Jersey Supreme Court deter- mined that a husband’s right to procreate was not disturbed by its ruling that remaining frozen embryos from the husband and wife be destroyed according to the wishes of the wife. Developments in in vitro fertilization led to SURROGATE MOTHERHOOD, which has caused legal battles as well. In these cases, a woman agrees either to be artificially inseminated by a sperm- donor father or to have a fertilized ovum inserted into her uterus. After giving birth, the surrogate mother legally surrenders the infant to the person or couple who will adopt and rear the child. The idea of surrogate motherhood is attractive to some couples because a child born of a surrogate mother will share half or all the genetic material of the parents who will raise the child. One of the most publicized cases regarding surrogate motherhood is that of Baby M. In 1985, Mary Beth Whitehead agreed to be inseminated with the sperm of William Stern and, upon the birth of the child, relinquish her parental rights to Stern. But once the child was born, Whitehead found that she did not wish to give up the child, a girl whom she named Sara. A court battle ensued, during which Stern, along with his wife, Elizabeth, were granted temporary custody of the child they had named Melissa. The court decided that Whitehead’s parental rights were to be terminated, and Elizabeth Stern was granted the right to immediately adopt the child. The New Jersey Supreme Court overturned this verdict in part on February 2, 1988, restoring Whitehead’s parental rights and invalidating Elizabeth Stern’s ADOPTION, but granting William Stern custody of the infant. Many surrogate mothers are close friends or relatives of the childless couple. However, the practice of commercial surrogate arrangements has increased greatly since the late 1980s. Many major cities have surrogate agencies, which are often run by doctors and lawyers who maintain lists of poten tial surrogate mothers and help match a woman with a couple wanting to have a baby. Commercial surrogate agencies typically charge a fee of $10,000 or more to make the arrangements, which is in addition to the surrogate mother’s expenses and fees, which may range from $10,000 to $100,000. Commercial surrogate arrangements are not legal in all states, and there is little CASE LAW on the subject. Some states declare surrogacy contracts null, void, and unenforceable because they are against PUBLIC POLICY. Opponents of commercial surrogacy believe that such arrangements exploit the surrogate mother and turn the child into a commodity. They also GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION REPRODUCTION 341 are co ncerned that if a child is born with a disability, the adoptive parents may decline to take the child. Finally, ther e is the issue of the surrogate mother who might not wish to surrender the child after birth. Other medical developments have also stirred controversy. In 1997, scientists success- fully cloned the first adult anima l, leading to speculation that the process could be used to clone human beings. Scientists first successfully inserted DNA from one human cell into another human egg, but they do not expect successful human cloning to be possible for several years. The issue has caused heated debates focusing on the scientific, moral, and religious concerns over the possibility that an adult human could be cloned. Reproductive Hazards in the Workplace Legal disputes have arisen when employers have barred pregnant women and women of child- bearing age from jobs that pose potential hazards to the fetus. The Supreme Court, in United Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls, 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L. Ed. 2d 158 (1991), ruled that a female employee cannot be excluded from jobs that expose her to health risks that may harm her fetus. The Court found that the exclusion of the women violated Title VII of the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 (42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e et seq.) because the company policy only applied to fertile women, not fertile men. Justice Black- mun, in his majority opinion, noted that the policy singled out women on the basis of gender and childbearing capacity rather than on the basis of fertility alone. Concerns about the health of a child born to a worker at the plant were to be left “to the parents who conceive, bear, support, and raise them [the children] rather than to the employers who hire those parents.” FURTHER READINGS “Genetics, Reproduction, and the Law.” 1999. Trial 35 (July). Hollinger, Joan Heifetz. 1985. “From Coitus to Commerce: Legal and Social Consequences of Noncoital Reproduc- tion.” University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 18 (summer). “In re Baby M” (colloquy). 1988. Georgetown Law Journal 76 (June). “In re Baby M” (symposium). 1988. Seton Hall Law Review 18 (fall). Levy, Stephanie. 2001. “Whose Embryo Is It Anyway? Courts Wrestle with Issues of High-tech Reproduc- tion.” Trial 37 (December). Palmer, Louis J. 2009. Encyclopedia of Abortion in the United States. 2d ed. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland. Perry, Michael J. 2009. Constitutional Rights, Moral Controversy, and the Supreme Court. New York: Cam- bridge University Press. Rahman, Anika. 1995. “Toward Government Accountability for Women’s Reproductive Rights.” St. John’s Law Review 69 (winter-spring). Ridder, Stephanie, and Lisa Woll. 1989. “Transforming the Grounds: Autonomy and Reproductive Freedom.” Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 2 (fall). Robertson, John A. 1988. “Procreative Liberty and the State’s Burden of Proof in Regulating Noncoital Reproduction.” Law, Medicine & Health Care 16 (spring-summer). CROSS R EFERENCES Abortion; Adoption; Constitutional Amendment; Fetal Rights; Fetal Tissue Research; Genetic Engineering; Hus- band and Wife; Parent and Child; Penumbra; Privacy; Sex Discrimination; Wattleton, Alyce Faye; Women’s Rights. REPUBLIC That form of government in which the adminis- tration of affairs is open to all the citizens. A political unit or “state,” independent of its form of government. The word republic, derived from the Latin res publica, or “public thing,” refers to a form of government where the citizens conduct their affairs for their own benefit rather than for the benefit of a ruler. Historically republics have not always been democratic in character, however. For example, the ancient Republic of Venice was ruled by an aristocratic elite. In the U.S. historical tradition, the belief in republicanism shaped the U.S. Revolution and Constitution. Before the revolution, leaders developed many political theories to justify independence from Great Britain. THOMAS PAINE, in his book Common Sense (1776), called for a representative government for the colonies and for a written constitution. Paine rejected the legitimacy of the monarchy to have a part in government. This attack on the king was echoed the following year in the Declaration of Independence, where THOMAS JEFFERSON pro- posed that colonists reject the monarchy and become republican citizens. Framers of the U.S. Constitution intended to create a republican government. Article IV, Section 4, states “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government ” Though the language was vague, the authors of the Constitution clearly intended to prevent the rise to power of either a monarchy or a hereditary aristocracy. Article I, Section 9, states, “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 342 REPUBLIC States,” and most state constitutions have similar provisions. The guarantee of republican government was designed to provide a national remedy for domestic insurrection threatening the state gov- ernments and to prevent the rise of a monarchy, about which there was some talk at the time. JAMES MADISON, the author of many of the essays included in The Federalist Papers (1787– 88), put forward a sophisticated concept of republican government. He explained in Num- ber 10 that a republic must be contrasted with a democracy. In the eighteenth century the term “democracy” meant what is now called a pure or direct democracy, wherein l egislation is made by a primary assembly of citizens, as existed in several rural Swiss cantons and in New England towns. In a pure democracy, Madison argued, there is no check on the majority to protect the weaker party or individuals and therefore such democracies “have ever been spectacles of turbu- lence and contention,” where rights of personal security and property are always in jeopardy. By a republic, Madison meant a system in which representatives are chosen by the citizens to exercise the powers of government. In Number 39 of The Federalist Papers, he returned to this theme, saying that a republic “is a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people; and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior.” Generally, such leaders as Madison and JOHN ADAMS believed that republicanism rests on the foundation of a balanced constitution, involving a SEPARATION OF POWERS and checks and balances. The republican form of government has remained a constant in U.S. politics. State constitutions follow the federal constitution in dividing powers among the legislative, execu- tive, and judicial branches. Likewise, states have adopted the various checks and balances that exist between the three branches, including the executive VETO power and JUDICIAL REVIEW. The U.S. Supreme Court has stayed out of controversies that involve whether the govern- ment of a state is republican in character. For example, in Pacific States Telephone and Tele- graph Co. v. Oregon, 223 U.S. 118, 32 S. Ct. 224, 56 L. Ed. 377 (1912), the Court declined to rule whether state legislation by initiative and REFERENDUM (legislation approved directly by the people through the ballot) was inconsistent with republicanism. The Court refused to rule because it considered this issue a POLITICAL QUESTION outside its jurisdiction. It is now well established that it is the province of Congress and the president, not the courts, to decide whether the government of a state is republican in character. CROSS REFERENCES Constitution of the United Sta tes; Federalist Papers; Locke, John. REPUBLICAN PARTY The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by a group of renegade Democrats, Whigs, and political independents who opposed the The title page of Common Sense by Thomas Paine. In the book, published in 1776, Paine called for the creation of a republic in the form of a representative government with a written constitution. CORBIS-BETTMANN. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION REPUBLICAN PARTY 343 expansion of SLAVERY into new U.S. territories and states. What began as a single-issue, independent party became a major political force in the United States. Six years after the NEW PARTY was formed, Republican nominee ABRAHAM LINCOLN was elected president. The Republican Party and its counter- part, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY, became the mainstays of the nation’s DE FACTO two-party system. Lincoln’s victory in 1860 signaled the demise of the Whig Party and the ascendance of Republican politics. From 1860 to 1931 the Republicans dominated U.S. presidential elec- tions. Only two Democrats were elected to the White House during the 70-year period of Republican pre-eminence. The early Republican Party was shaped by political conscience and regionalism. Through- out the early and mid-nineteenth century, states in the North and South were bitterly divided over the issues of slavery and state sovereignty. In 1854 the enactment of the KANSAS-NEBRASKA ACT inflamed political passions. Under the act, residents of the new territories of Kansas and Nebraska could decide whether to permit slavery in their regions. In effect, the act invalidated the MISSOURI COMPROMISE OF 1820, which prohibited the extension of slavery in new areas of the United States. Opponents of slavery condemne d the measure, and violence erupted in Kansas. Antislavery parties had already sprung up in the United States. The abolitionist Liberty Party began in 1840, and the FREE SOIL PARTY was formed in 1848. In much the same spirit, the Republican Party arose to protest the Nebraska- Kansas Act. The new group drew support from third parties and disaffected Democrats and Whigs. After organizational meetings in 1854 in Ripon, Wisconsin, and Jackson, Michigan, the Republican Party was born. In 1856 the Republicans nominated their first presidential candidate, John C. Frémont, a former explorer who opposed the expansion of slavery in new U.S. territories and states. Although defeated in the national election by Democrat JAMES BUCHANAN , Frémont received one-third of the popular vote. In 1860 Abraham Lincoln of Illinois was the Repub lican presidential nominee. Lincoln appealed not only to antislavery voters but also to business owners in the East and farmers in the Midwest. The Democratic Party was in turmoil over slavery. The northern Democrats nominated STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS, who tried to sidestep the issue, and the southern Democrats backed John C. Breckinridge, who denounced government efforts to prohibit slavery. Lincoln defeated both candidates. Although Lincoln’s election was a triumph for the Republicans, his support was concen- trated primarily in the North. Shortly after Lincoln’s victory, several southern states se- ceded from the Union, and the bloody U.S. CIVIL WAR began. Throughout the war, Lincoln and his poli- cies took a drubbing from the press and public. When Lincoln ran for re-election, the Republi- can Party temporarily switched its name to the Union Party. Lincoln sought a second term with Democrat ANDREW JOHNSON as his running mate in order to deflect criticism of the Republican Party. Johnson, of Tennessee, was one of the few southerners to support the preservation of the Union. Despite his critics, Lincoln defeated the Democratic nominee, George B. McClellan, who ran on a peace platform. After the North’s victory in 1865, the Republicans oversaw RECONSTRUCTION, a period of rebuilding for the vanquished South. Lincoln favored a more conciliatory attitude toward the defeated CONFEDERACY. Radical Republicans, however, sought a complete overhaul of the South’s economic and social system. After Lincoln’s ASSASSINATION in 1865, the Republicans’ Republican National Political Convention Sites, 1856 to 2008 Year 1856 1860 1864 1868 1872 1876 1880 1884 1888 1892 1896 1900 1904 1908 1912 1916 1920 1924 1928 1932 Site Philadelphia Chicago Baltimore Chicago Philadelphia Cincinnati Chicago Chicago Chicago Minneapolis St. Louis Philadelphia Chicago Chicago Chicago Chicago Chicago Cleveland Kansas City, KS Chicago Site Cleveland Philadelphia Chicago Philadelphia Chicago San Francisco Chicago San Francisco Miami Beach Miami Beach Kansas City, MO Detroit Dallas New Orleans Houston San Diego Philadelphia New York City Minneapolis/St. Paul Year 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 SOURCE: The World Almanac and the 2008 Republican National Convention Web p a g e. ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION 344 REPUBLICAN PARTY Reconstruction policies—such as conferring citizenship and voting rights for former slaves—created long-lasting resentment among many southern whites. Republicans depended upon the support of northern voters and courted the vote of emancipated slaves. The party fanned hostility by reminding northern voters of the South’s disloyalty during the war. The Republicans were the dominant party in the United States from 1860 to 1931, and the party’s base among southern whites began to grow in the 1950s, when political loyalties began to shift. During their long period of political domi- nance, Republicans sent the following candi- dates to the White House: ULYSSES S. GRANT, RUTHERFORD B. HAYES, JAMES GARFIELD (died in office), CHESTER A. ARTHUR (vice president who succeeded Garfield), BENJAMIN HARRISON, WILLIAM MCKINLEY (died in office), THEODORE ROOSEVELT (vice president who succeeded McKinley and was later elect ed on his own), WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT , WARREN G. HARDING, CALVIN COOLIDGE, and HERBERT HOOVER. During the 1880s and 1890s there was an important shift in party affiliation. Struggling Republican farmers throughout the Midwest, South, and West switched their political al le- giance to the Democrats, who promised them government assistance. The financially strapped farmers were concerned about the depressed national economy. Many turned to the populist movement headed by Democrat WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN . A brilliant orator, Bryan called for the free coinage of silver currency, whereas the Republicans favored the gold standard. Despite his popularity Bryan was defeated by Republican William McKinley in the 1896 presidential election. The Democrats appealed to farmers, but the Republicans had captured the business and urban vote. After the U.S. economy improved during the McKinley ad- ministration, supporters dubbed the Republican Party “the Grand Old Party,” or the GOP, a nickname that endures. After President McKinley was assassinated in 1901, Vice President Theodore Roosevelt assumed the presidency. He pursued ambitious social reforms such as stricter antitrust laws, tougher meat and drug regulations, and new environmental measures. In 1912 Roosevelt and his followers broke off from the Repub- licans to form the Bull Moose Party. The split helped Democrat Woodrow Wilson defeat Republican candidate William Howard Taft. After eight years of Democratic power, during which the U.S. fought in WORLD WAR I, the Republicans returned to the White House in 1920 with Warren G. Harding. Unable to stave off or reverse the Great Depression, the Republicans lost the Oval Office in 1932. During the Great Depression the public became impatient with the ineffectual econo- mic policies of Republican President He rbert Hoover. Democrat FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT swept into the White House with a promise of a NEW DEAL for all Americans. From 1932 to 1945 Roosevelt lifted the nation from its economic collapse and guided it through WORLD WAR II . Dur ing Roosevelt’s administration, the The Republican Party nominated Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin as its candidates for president and vice president in the 1860 election. BETTMANN/CORBIS. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION REPUBLICAN PARTY 345 Republican Party lost its traditional constitu- ency of African Americans and urban workers. HARRY S. TRUMAN followed Roosevelt in office and in 1948 withstood a strong challenge from Republican THOMAS E. DEWEY. Republican DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER won the presidency in 1952 and 1956. A popular World War II hero, Eisenhower oversaw a good economy and a swift end to the KOREAN WAR. Eisenhower was succeeded in 1960 by Democrat JOHN F. KENNEDY, who defeated Eisenhower ’s vice president, Republican nominee RICHARD M. NIXON. In 1964 Republicans nominated ultra- conservative BARRY M. GOLDWATER, who was trounced at the polls by Democrat LYNDON B. JOHNSON, the INCUMBENT. Johnson, Kennedy’s vice president, had assumed the presidency after Kennedy’s assassination in 1963. When Republican Richard M. Nixon was elected president in 1968, he began the reduc- tion of U.S. military troops in Southeast Asia. Nixon opened trade with China and improved foreign relations through a policy of detente with the former Soviet Union. During his term, the shift of southern Democrats to the Republi- can Party accelerated. (In fact, from 1972 to 1988, the South was the most Rep ublican region of the United States.) The nadir for the Republican Party occurred in 1974, when Nixon left office in the midst of the WATERGATE scandal, a botched attempt to burglarize and wiretap the Democratic Nationa l Committee headquarters. Implicated in the scandal’s cover-up, Nixon became the only president in U.S. history to resign from office. He was succeeded by Vice President GERALD R. FORD of Michigan, who served the remainder of Nixon’s term and pardoned the disgraced president. Ford lost the 1976 presidential election to Democrat JIMMY CARTER of Georgia. A sour economy and the bungling of foreign affairs (most notably the Iran hostage crisis) led to Carter’s defeat in 1980 by Republican challenger RONALD REAGAN and his running mate, GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH . The Republicans controlled the White House for twelve years, with Reagan serving two terms and Bush one. During Reagan’s tenure, southern Democrats turned in droves to the Republican Party, embracing Reagan’s politically conservative message. Pointing to widespread ticket-splitting, many analysts be- lieve voters embraced the charismatic Reagan, not the party. Bush became president in 1988 but was defeated in 1992 by Democrat BILL CLINTON of Arkansas. For the first time in 40 years, the Republican Party gained a majority in Congress in 1994 on a platform called the CONTRACT WITH AMERICA.It laid out a legislative program that was embraced by Georgia congressman NEWT GINGRICH,who was elected Speaker of the House in 1995. Very few parts of the platform became law, and the internal reforms of the House of Representa- tives led to the concentration of power in a few leaders. The new Republican majority joined traditional party members who favored low taxes and the promotion of business with social conservatives who were opposed to ABORTION, gay rights, and GUN CONTROL and who favored prayer and religion in public schools. The Republican Party in the New Millennium The 2000 presidential election signaled the end of Bill Clinton’s two-term tenure as president. Texas governor GEORGE W. BUSH, the presumptive Republican favorite, stumbled at first but defeated Arizona senator JOHN MCCAIN for the presidential nomination, while Vice President ALBERT GORE easily defeated New Jersey senator and professional basketball player Bill Bradley for the Democratic nomination. After a spirit ed and close race, it became evident late on election night that Florida’s25 electoral votes held the key to victory. Bush carried a lead in Florida of a few thousand votes. When the votes were finally tallied on Novem- ber 8, minus the late-arriving overseas ballots, Bush was ahead of Gore by 1,784 votes, or less than .5 percent of the total number of votes tabulated for the U.S. Presidency in Florida. Under Florida Election Law, a recount was automatic in these circumstances, unless Gore refused, which he did not. The recount was performed by machine and was designed to correct any errors in the first machine tabula- tion of the vote. On November 10, the first recount was complete. Bush’s lead had dwin- dled to 327 votes. Emboldened by his gains in the machine recount, Gore sought a manual hand recount of votes cast in certain heavily Democratic coun- ties. Bush opposed any manual recount, which sparked a series of court battles that ultimately went to the U.S. Court. In BUSH V. GORE, 531 GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 346 REPUBLICAN PARTY U.S. 98, 121 S. Ct. 525, 148 L. Ed. 2d 388 (2000), the Supreme Court ruled that the system devised by the Florida Supreme Court to recount the votes cast in the state during the 2000 U.S. presidential election violated the EQUAL PROTECTION Clause of the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT to the federal Constitution. Because there was no time to create a system that would be fair to both candidates, the Supreme Court effectively stopped the recount process in its tracks, allowing George W. Bush of Texas to win Florida’s 25 electoral votes, enough to become the 43rd President of the United States. The 2000 election results marked the first time since 1954 that the GOP controlled the White House, Sen ate, and House of Represen- tatives. In 2002 the Republicans increased their Congressional advantage in both chambers and did the same in 2004, when George W. Bush defeated the Democratic nominee, Ma ssachu- setts Senator John Kerry. However, the deterio- rating war in Iraq steadily eroded the popularity of Bush and the Republican Congress. In 2005 Bush sought to change the SOCIAL SECURITY system to permit individuals to invest part of their contributions in investment accounts. This initiative went nowhere. In addition, the large deficits that resulted from Republican legisla- tion eroded traditional support from fiscal conservatives. Not surprisingly, the Democrats regained control of both the House and Senate. The 2008 presidential election process featured a large slate of candidates from both parties. Republican candidates sought to pro- mote the legacy of Ronald Reagan and a strong brand of fiscal and social conservatism. In doing so, they implicitly rejected the spending policies of Bush. However, Senator John McCai n, a person who attracted moderate Republicans and independent voters, secured the nomina- tion very easily. He selected as his running mate Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. This was a surprising choice because Palin was virtu ally unknown outside of her state and had been in office less than two years. Palin proved to have strong conservative credentials, and her ability to energize a party base that was skeptical about McCain at times overshadowed the Arizona senator. By early September, the ticket had gained a small lead over the Democratic ticket of Illinois’s Senator BARACK OBAMA and Dela- ware’s Senator Joe Biden. The roof fell in on the Republican ticket when the U.S. economy went into a tailspin in early September, and the financial markets appeared to be on the verge of collapse. McCain stated that the U.S. economy was fundamentally strong, which made him appear to be out of touch. Obama benefited from the financial crisis, arguing that the Bush administration’s commitment to free-market ideology and minimal government oversight had led to the collapse. The Democratic nominee also benefited from his decision to forgo public financing of his campaign. Using the Internet and a crack team of fundraiser s, the Obama campaign outspent the McCain campaign by hundreds of millions of dollars. Palin ultimately hurt the ticket because of a series of damaging interviews that underscored her lack of detailed knowledge about national issues. In the end, Obama beat McCain decisively, and Democrats increased their majorities in Congress. With the seating of Minnesota Senator Al Franken in July 2009, after a long recount battle, the Democrats reached a filibuster-proof 60 votes. As 2009 unfolded, the Rep ublican Party was in its worst position since the 1964 elections. With no acknowledged leader, the party began to debate whether it needed to become more conservative or more moderate. The coalition of social and fiscal conservatives who had elected Reagan and the two Bushes, as well as congressional majoriti es, was in tatters. Na- tional public opinion polls showed that only about 20 percent of Americans called them- selves Republicans. FURTHER READINGS Boller, Paul F., Jr. 2004. Presidential Campaigns. New York: Oxford University Press. Edwards, Mickey. 2008. Reclaiming Conservatism: How a Great American Political Movement Got Lost—And How It Can Find Its Way Back. New York: Oxford University Press. Gould, Lewis L. 2003. Grand Old Party: A History of the Republicans. New York: Random House. Joondeph, Bradley W. 2008. “Federalism, the Rehnquist Court, and the Modern Republican Party.” Oregon Law Review 87. Moos, Malcolm. 1956. The Republicans: A History of Their Party. New York: Random House. Nelson, Michael. 2009. The Elections of 2008. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. Wilson, James Q. 2003. American Government. 6th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. REPUBLICATION The reexecution or reestablishment by a testator of a will that he or she had once revoked. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION REPUBLICATION 347 . Convention Sites, 185 6 to 20 08 Year 185 6 186 0 186 4 186 8 187 2 187 6 188 0 188 4 188 8 189 2 189 6 1900 1904 19 08 1912 1916 1920 1924 19 28 1932 Site Philadelphia Chicago Baltimore Chicago Philadelphia Cincinnati Chicago Chicago Chicago Minneapolis St series of court battles that ultimately went to the U.S. Court. In BUSH V. GORE, 531 GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 346 REPUBLICAN PARTY U.S. 98, 121 S. Ct. 525, 1 48 L. Ed. 2d 388 (2000),. overhaul of the South’s economic and social system. After Lincoln’s ASSASSINATION in 186 5, the Republicans’ Republican National Political Convention Sites, 185 6 to 20 08 Year 185 6 186 0 186 4 186 8 187 2 187 6 188 0 188 4 188 8 189 2 189 6 1900 1904 19 08 1912 1916 1920 1924 19 28 1932 Site Philadelphia Chicago Baltimore Chicago Philadelphia Cincinnati Chicago Chicago Chicago Minneapolis St.