Tag Archives: Dobbs v Jackson
Dobbs Sentences #118: Part II B 3
Paragraph 6 of 11 Sentence 4 of 4 This sentence has two claims that need some discussion: “That is not surprising since common-law authorities had repeatedly condemned abortion and described it as an ‘unlawful’ act without regard to whether it occurred before or after quickening. See supra, at 16–21.” The claims: The phrase that separates […]
Dobbs Sentences #117: Part II B 3
Paragraph 6 of 11 Sentence 3 of 4 This sentence contains two claims that are closely related but different in an important way: “When legislatures began to exercise that authority as the century wore on, no one, as far as we are aware, argued that the laws they enacted violated a fundamental right.” The claims: […]
Dobbs Sentences #116: Part II B 3
Paragraph 6 of 11 Sentence 2 of 4 This sentence contains three claims: “But the insistence on quickening was not universal, see Mills v. Commonwealth, 13 Pa., at 633; State v. Slagle, 83 N.C. 630, 632 (1880), and regardless, the fact that many States in the late 18th and early 19th century did not criminalize […]
Dobbs Sentences #115: Part II B 3
Paragraph 6 of 11 Sentence 1 of 4 I see three claims in the next sentence: “The Solicitor General next suggests that history supports an abortion right because the common law’s failure to criminalize abortion before quickening means that ‘at the Founding and for decades thereafter, women generally could terminate a pregnancy, at least in […]
Dobbs Sentences #114: Part II B 3
Paragraph 5 of 11 Sentence 4 of 4 The single claim in this sentence could not be simpler: “Continued reliance on such scholarship is unsupportable.” Since I haven’t come to a conclusion about the scholarship in question, I definitely can’t make a determination about this claim yet. So . . . undetermined again:
Dobbs Sentences #113: Part II B 3
Paragraph 5 of 11 Sentence 3 of 4 The next sentence contains one claim: “An internal memorandum characterized this author’s work as donning ‘the guise of impartial scholarship while advancing the proper ideological goals.’39” This is the revelation from the last sentence, I guess. End note 39 should point us to the appropriate materials. End […]
Dobbs Sentences #112: Part II B 3
Paragraph 5 of 11 Sentence 2 of 4 Two more claims in the next sentence: “These articles have been discredited,38 and it has come to light that even members of Jane Roe’s legal team did not regard them as serious scholarship.” The claims: I have no doubt that the articles have been disputed, and end […]
Dobbs Sentences #111: Part II B 3
Paragraph 5 of 11 Sentence 1 of 4 The next paragraph opens with two claims: “Instead of following these authorities, Roe relied largely on two articles by a pro-abortion advocate who claimed that Coke had intentionally misstated the common law because of his strong anti-abortion views.37” And here are the two claims: I’m not even […]
Dobbs Sentences #110: Part II B 3
Paragraph 4 of 11 Sentence 4 of 4 The final sentence of this paragraph contains at least two claims: “Moreover, Hale and Blackstone (and many other authorities following them) asserted that even a pre-quickening abortion was ‘unlawful’ and that, as a result, an abortionist was guilty of murder if the woman died from the attempt.” […]
Dobbs Sentences #109: Part II B 3
Paragraph 4 of 11 Sentence 3 of 4 There are a few tightly-bound claims in this sentence: “But as we have seen, great common-law authorities like Bracton, Coke, Hale, and Blackstone all wrote that a post-quickening abortion was a crime—and a serious one at that.” Here’s where we get into issues that annoy people who […]
Cynical Jason 