Question

In R v. Morgentaler (1993), the Supreme Court of Canada held that ________.

1) The impugned provincial legislation was a valid exercise of the Criminal Law power.
2) The primary purpose of the impugned legislation was to prohibit abortions outside hospitals as socially undesirable conduct.
3) The primary purpose of the impugned legislation was to promote the health and safety of pregnant women and protect the integrity of Nova Scotia's health care system.
4) The impugned legislation was a valid exercise of Nova Scotia's power to legislate on Property and Civil Rights in the province.

Answer 1

The Supreme Court of Canada, in R v. Morgentaler (1993), ruled that the impugned Nova Scotia legislation was intended to protect women's health and the provincial healthcare system's integrity, but ultimately struck down the legislation as it exceeded provincial jurisdiction and violated constitutional rights.

Step-by-step explanation:

In R v. Morgentaler (1993), the Supreme Court of Canada held that the primary purpose of the impugned legislation was to promote the health and safety of pregnant women and protect the integrity of Nova Scotia's healthcare system. Unlike the earlier Roe v. Wade decision in the U.S., where abortion was made legal during the first trimester on a national level, the Morgentaler ruling focused on whether provincial legislation exceeded its jurisdiction under criminal law and whether it infringed on women's constitutional rights.

The Court did not find the provincial legislation to be a valid exercise of the Criminal Law power, nor did it regard the legislation as a valid exercise of Nova Scotia's power regarding Property and Civil Rights in the province. Therefore, the legislation in question was struck down, reinforcing the Morgentaler precedent that Canadian women have the right to choose an abortion without undue restrictive legislation interfering.