Category Uncategorized
Dobbs Sentences #190: Part II D 3
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 2 of 8 One claim in this sentence: “The dissent has much to say about the effects of pregnancy on women, the burdens of motherhood, and the difficulties faced by poor women.” I don’t doubt that this is true, but it will take some time to rake up the citations […]
Dobbs Sentences #189: Part II D 3
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 1 of 8 Just one simple claim in this sentence: “That view is evident throughout the dissent.” I hope they bring some support. I have a feeling, though, that any determination here will require a complete reading of the dissent. It could be a while. This is undetermined:
Dobbs Sentences #188: Part II D 3
Paragraph 1 of 3 Sentence 5 of 5 This sentence appears to have two claims: “So if the rights at issue in those cases are fundamentally the same as the right recognized in Roe and Casey, the implication is clear: The Constitution does not permit the States to regard the destruction of a ‘potential life’ […]
Dobbs Sentences #187: Part II D 3
Paragraph 1 of 3 Sentence 4 of 5 This sentence contains two claims: “The exercise of the rights at issue in Griswold, Eisenstadt, Lawrence, and Obergefell does not destroy a ‘potential life,’ but an abortion has that effect.” These are true. Abortion is abortion and things that aren’t abortion aren’t abortion. The majority’s reluctance to […]
Dobbs Sentences #186: Part II D 3
Paragraph 1 of 3 Sentence 3 of 5 This is one of the more notorious sentences in this decision: “Perhaps this is designed to stoke unfounded fear that our decision will imperil those other rights, but the dissent’s analogy is objectionable for a more important reason: what it reveals about the dissent’s views on the […]
Dobbs Sentences #185: Part II D 3
Paragraph 1 of 3 Sentence 2 of 5 This sentence is a single claim: “This is evident in the analogy that the dissent draws between the abortion right and the rights recognized in Griswold (contraception), Eisenstadt (same), Lawrence (sexual conduct with member of the same sex), and Obergefell (same-sex marriage).” Here’s the claim with the […]
Dobbs Sentences #184: Part II D 3
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 […]
Dobbs Sentences #183: Part II D 2
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 4 of 4 This sentence contains at least three claims: “There are occasions when past decisions should be overruled, and as we will explain, this is one of them.” The claims: I’m positive that the first claim can’t be quickly confirmed, and the other two look to be expanded on […]
Dobbs Sentences #182: Part II D 2
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 3 of 4 This sentence is one claim: “But as the Court has reiterated time and time again, adherence to precedent is not ‘“an inexorable command.”’ Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, 576 U.S. 446, 455 (2015).” I’ll rephrase the claim to make it less awkward standing alone: This paragraph appears […]
Dobbs Sentences #181: Part II D 2
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 2 of 4 This sentence contains two claims: “Under the doctrine of stare decisis, those precedents are entitled to careful and respectful consideration, and we engage in that analysis below.” The claims: The first claim is just a description of stare decisis as this Court understands it (and what is […]
Cynical Jason 