Institutional Affiliation

Overturning the Roe v. Wade Case

There have been controversies revolving around the issue of abortion in America and across the world. Both proposers proponents and opponents of abortion have had varying opinions regarding the legality and illegality of the practice. In 19773, the Supreme Court encountered heard a case, Roe v. Wade. The court ruled that the Constitution permits women the right to terminate their pregnancies within the first six months of pregnancy. Before this ruling, many states prohibited abortion while others allowed it, especially if it endangered the mother’s life. However, during Roe v. Wade case, the court ruled that states would only restrict abortion during the first trimester (Pan, 2022) This is not MLA style. We discussed this in class. For To Roe and her attorney, the Texas statute for abortion violated her constitutional rights to terminate her pregnancy based on her condition of being poor, single and would not afford to raise the child. It is unclear if the Constitution supports the right to abortion or not because the American Constitution does not make an express reference to the right to terminate a fetus. 

You haven’t followed directions. I asked for a two-paragraph introduction. The first paragraph was to give background. The second was to articulate the problem/controversy/issue/debate.




Needs Improvement

Missing/ unsatisfactory


qexcellent qgood qneeds improvement qIs missing

qIs unrelated to the topic


qexcellent qgood qneeds improvement qIs missing

qMissing bibliographic information  (if a text is used)

qDoesn’t identify the topic of the text 

qinaccurately describes the author’s argument 

qNot enough background information about the topic

qIs a rough patchwork of information from multiple sources, not a cohesive overview of the topic
qExcessive quoting
qis a seemingly random assortment of facts/ideas instead of a organized, coherent, purposeful providing of information because connections are not made or the ordering of ideas is not logical.
qMany short, choppy sentences; needs reworking to feel like a cohesive narrative.
qIncludes irrelevant details
qIs biased


qexcellent qgood qneeds improvement qIs missing

qDoesn’t accurately name the controversy/debate/conflict/issue

qToo concise – need more context

qToo detailed – save some details for the body

qDoesn’t connect summary/background to the thesis


qexcellent qgood qneeds improvement qIs missing

qDoesn’t state the writer’s position on the prompt qDoesn’t have multiple supporting reasons

qReasons are unclear qThe reasons are too similar qPoorly formatted  qImproper placement