As always, you can find the Dobbs v. Jackson decision here.

Paragraph 2 of 3

Sentence 3 of 4

The third sentence in this paragraph is one claim, but it contains a couple more claims that are worth looking at independently. Here’s the sentence:

“American law followed the common law until a wave of statutory restrictions in the 1800s expanded criminal liability for abortions.”

A paradigm shift, if true.

The whole sentence is one claim:

• “American law followed the common law until a wave of statutory restrictions in the 1800s expanded criminal liability for abortions.”

Is this generally acknowledged as the point at which American law sheds its reliance on common law?It’s an interesting question. Here are two more claims embedded in that sentence:

• “American law followed the common law until [. . .] the 1800s.”
• “[A] wave of statutory restrictions in the 1800s expanded criminal liability for abortions.”

I’m not sure that the claim made by the full sentence or the claim made by the first fragment carry much weight, but the last bit seems significant, if not important. What are these “statutory restrictions” and what were the changes in “criminal liability for abortions”? What led to these restrictions? How were they argued? Were they argued? Who decided? These are concepts that deserve deeper investigation.

Just passing through, though. These three claims are all undetermined.