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

Paragraph 3 of 3

Sentence 3 of 4

Two claims in this sentence:

“According to the dissent, the Constitution requires the States to regard a fetus as lacking even the most basic human right—to live—at least until an arbitrary point in a pregnancy has passed.”

The claims:

• “According to the dissent, the Constitution requires the States to regard a fetus as lacking even the most basic human right [. . .] at least until an arbitrary point in a pregnancy has passed.”
• “[T]o live” is “the most basic human right.”

The first claim, again, requires a more thorough reading of the dissent than I’ve managed to this point, and the majority doesn’t even cite a specific passage that expresses that idea. The second claim is pretty basic, and even if it were arguable I don’t know that there’s any point in arguing it. I’ll call it true unless someone wants to challenge it.

One undetermined claim:

• “According to the dissent, the Constitution requires the States to regard a fetus as lacking even the most basic human right [. . .] at least until an arbitrary point in a pregnancy has passed.”

And one true claim:

• “[T]o live” is “the most basic human right.”