The Court Wrongly Strips Women of a Fundamental Right
Dr. David Adler · July 11, 2022
On June 24, 2022, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Supreme Court, in an unprecedented power grab, eviscerated a fundamental, constitutional right. This decision will be judged by history as harshly as the decades have condemned Dred Scott and Korematsu. The willingness of the far-right majority to strip women of the right to abortion demonstrates contempt for women's rights, bodily autonomy, history, reason and legal precedent. The practice of abortion, contrary to Justice Samuel Alito's opinion is, in fact, deeply rooted in our history. At the time of the founding, state laws protected access to abortion until the point of quickening. As the world has long known the Court, in the landmark ruling in 1973 in Roe v. Wade, held that women possess a constitutional right to govern their own reproductive organs. Justice Alito's lame effort to undercut the right of abortion…
Members only. Join for $19.99/month
More on Constitution & the Courts
Trump's Slush Fund Reflects Concentration of Power in the Executive, Collapse of Constitutional Guardrails
One of the grave consequences for American Constitutionalism of the untrammeled concentration of power in the hands of President Donald Trump--the putative goal of Project 2025--is his total control over the Department of Justice.
James Madison: The President May Pervert His Administration into a Scheme of Peculation and Oppression
James Madison's prescient warning about a president who might engineer a scheme of deep-seated and pervasive corruption, grounded in self-dealing to enrich himself and strengthen his ties to law-breaking loyalists through arbitrary acts that violate the Constitution and republican principles, reverberates across the nation at this juncture in our history as Americans learn more details about President Donald Trump's underhanded operations.
Justice Thomas' Speech: Political Attacks, Unanswered Judicial Questions
Justice Clarence Thomas's controversial speech at the University of Texas, which began as a commemoration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, inexplicably meandered across disconnected political postulates, reflected significant historical errors and left unanswered fundamental questions about the judicial ascertainment and enforcement of natural rights.
