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

Paragraph 4 of 5

Sentence 1 of 7

This sentence is a series of three claims:

“Roe was on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided, Casey perpetuated its errors, and those errors do not concern some arcane corner of the law of little importance to the American people.”

The claims:

• “Roe was on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided.”
• “Casey perpetuated its errors.”
• “[T]hose errors do not concern some arcane corner of the law of little importance to the American people.”

The first two claims are widely disputed, so until I can walk through each of them they’ll remain undetermined here. The phrasing of the third claim is awkward. No need to be coy–just state the case plainly. How about this?

“Those errors concern mainstream legal understanding that is important to the American people.”

I don’t know yet if that is correct or even supportable, but at least it’s clear and direct. We have three more undetermined claims here:

• “Roe was on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided.”
• “Casey perpetuated its errors.”
• “[T]hose errors do not concern some arcane corner of the law of little importance to the American people.”