Tag Archives: History and tradition
Dobbs Sentences #234: Part III A
Paragraph 3 of 5 Sentence 1 of 2 This sentence has two claims: “Roe was also egregiously wrong and deeply damaging.” The claims: I suppose you could make the case that the Court means the “also” to apply in parallel, but since the previous paragraph didn’t assert anything about deep damage, I’m not going to […]
Dobbs Sentences #233: Part III A
Part III A Paragraph 2 of 5 Sentence 3 of 3 This sentence looks like it has three claims: “It was ‘egregiously wrong’ on the day it was decided, see Ramos, 590 U. S., at ___ (opinion of Kavanaugh, J.) (slip op., at 7), and as the Solicitor General agreed at oral argument, it should […]
Dobbs History and Tradition #3
One element of the history and tradition that I’d like to examine more closely is the state and territorial laws listed in Appendices A and B of the Dobbs decision, presumably in order of their passing into law. One reason I want to look into this is the assertion that the Dobbs majority makes about […]
Dobbs History and Tradition #2
Earlier this week I was listening to Dahlia Lithwick’s Amicus podcast, and her guest was Ben Johnson, who has written about the Judiciary Act of 1925 and its corrosive effect on the integrity of the Court as a legitimate, authoritative judicial body. I was only half-listening, but I thought I heard Johnson say that the […]
Dobbs History and Tradition #1
I found a number of interesting claims in a Washington Post article written in May of 2022 by Gillian Brockell. She addresses some of the historical material the Dobbs majority discusses in the decision. About Matthew Hale: “At least seven times, Alito cited Sir Matthew Hale, a 17th-century jurist who didn’t think marital rape was […]
Reflections on Dobbs Part II
Part II is about history and tradition, which are both valuable if the history reveals good reasons for their preservation of tradition. On the other hand, if an idea appears in history without explanation, it’s just trivia. There’s a lot to dig into considering that out of 200 hundred sentences, most of which broke down […]
Dobbs Sentences #178: Part II D 2
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 2 of 2 This sentence contains two claims: “First, if the ‘long sweep of history’ imposes any restraint on the recognition of unenumerated rights, then Roe was surely wrong, since abortion was never allowed (except to save the life of the mother) in a majority of States for over 100 […]
Dobbs Sentences #175: Part II D 2
Paragraph 1 of 3 Sentence 1 of 2 This sentence has three claims—one of which being the whole sentence: “Because the dissent cannot argue that the abortion right is rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, it contends that the ‘constitutional tradition’ is ‘not captured whole at a single moment,’ and that its ‘meaning gains […]
Dobbs Sentences #174: Part II D 1
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 5 of 5 Just one claim in this sentence: “The dissent cannot establish that a right to abortion has ever been part of this Nation’s tradition.” If this sentence said “has not established,” it would pretty obviously be true, because not only has the dissent not established that, they haven’t […]
Dobbs Sentences #170: Part II D 1
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 1 of 5 This sentence is a single claim: “The dissent attempts to obscure this failure by misrepresenting our application of Glucksberg.” This is an awfully bitchy sentence for SCOTUS, isn’t it? It assigns “failure” to an action never attempted, for one thing. And an accusation of misrepresentation—that’s fun. Let’s […]
Cynical Jason 