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

Paragraph 1 of 3

Sentence 2 of 3

The next sentence has one tripartite claim:

“The dissent does not identify any pre-Roe authority that supports such a right—no state constitutional provision or statute, no federal or state judicial precedent, not even a scholarly treatise. Compare post, at 12–14, n. 2, with supra, at 15–16, and n. 23.”

Really, this is one claim, but it has three components:

• “The dissent does not identify any pre-Roe authority that supports such a right.”

but it has three components:

• “The dissent does not identify any [. . .] state constitutional provision or statute.”
• “The dissent does not identify any [. . .] federal or state judicial precedent.”
• “The dissent does not identify any [. . .] scholarly treatise.”

In the short term, it’s probably a waste of time to look at specific passages in support of this claim, since the claim is about what the dissent does not do, which can only be confirmed by examining the whole dissent and finding none of the claims Dobbs claims aren’t there.

So I’ll leave this unconfirmed until I can look at the dissent in greater depth:

• “The dissent does not identify any pre-Roe authority that supports such a right.”

Just for ease of reference, though, here’s the breakdown at first glance: As far as I can tell, “ post, at 12–14” refers to the same material I quoted at length in the previous sentence. I’m not going to burden the reader with that block of text again.

Here’s note 2:

“See, e.g., 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 129–130 (7th ed. 1775) (Blackstone); E. Coke, Institutes of the Laws of England 50 (1644).”

“Supra” means “earlier in this document,” so here is Dobbs pages 15-16:

“Until the latter part of the 20th century, there was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. No state constitutional provision had recognized such a right. Until a few years before Roe was handed down, no federal or state court had recognized such a right. Nor had any scholarly treatise of which we are aware. And although law review articles are not reticent about advocating new rights, the earliest article proposing a constitutional right to abortion that has come to our attention was published only a few years before Roe.23”

And note 23:

“See R. Lucas, Federal Constitutional Limitations on the Enforcement and Administration of State Abortion Statutes, 46 N. C. L. Rev. 730 (1968) (Lucas); see also D. Garrow, Liberty and Sexuality 334–335 (1994) (Garrow) (stating that Lucas was “undeniably the first person to fully articulate on paper” the argument that “a woman’s right to choose abortion was a fundamental individual freedom protected by the U. S. Constitution’s guarantee of personal liberty”). “