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

Paragraph 1 of 3

Sentence 1 of 5

This sentence has one claim with a few questionable phrases.

“The most striking feature of the dissent is the absence of any serious discussion of the legitimacy of the States’ interest in protecting fetal life.”

I’m hesitant about “most striking feature” and “any serious discussion.” I guess I’ll find out when I get through the dissent, but both of those phrases ping my sonar.

More to the point of this sentence though, is that the dissent is responding to a specific document. It seems to me that the “legitimacy of the States’ interest in protecting fetal life” is downplayed as a factor in the original document, and because of that there is little to respond to. I recognize that the “legitimacy of the States’ interest in protecting fetal life” is different from the status of the fetus, and the Dobbs Court has declared their lack of interest in discussing the latter, not the former, but in avoiding the discussion of the status of the fetus, they’ve neutered their case for the “legitimacy of the States’ interest in protecting fetal life.”

Anyway, I think the discussion to follow is going to provide whatever support Dobbs intends for this claim, so this is undetermined:

• “The most striking feature of the dissent is the absence of any serious discussion of the legitimacy of the States’ interest in protecting fetal life.”