As always, you can find the Dobbs v. Jackson decision here.
Here is a link to the Casey decision.
Paragraph 3 of 5
Sentence 6 of 6
The snark of the last couple of sentences continues to the end of the paragraph. We’re still just establishing arguments made in the past—in this case in the Casey decision—and haven’t made a move toward deciding the case yet. Here’s the last sentence of this paragraph:
“The Casey Court did not defend this unfocused analysis and instead grounded its decision solely on the theory that the right to obtain an abortion is part of the “liberty” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.”
This sentence contains two separate claims:
- “The Casey Court did not defend this unfocused analysis”
- The Casey Court “grounded its decision solely on the theory that the right to obtain an abortion is part of the “liberty” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.”
The first claim asserts a negative, and while a search to confirm that is confined to the Casey decision it’s still more searching than I’m going to undertake right now. If it becomes necessary later, I’ll do it, but I don’t think it will be necessary.
The second claim seems to refer to this sentence in Casey on page 44:
“Constitutional protection of the woman’s decision to terminate her pregnancy derives from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Here they assign the protection to the Due Process Clause and don’t mention anything else. I guess that could be taken as Casey having “grounded its decision solely on the theory that the right to obtain an abortion is part of the “liberty” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.”
So for this sentence we have one undetermined claim:
and one true claim.
As always, I’m open to correction. If you see something I don’t, let me know so I can address it.
Cynical Jason 