Tag Archives: Roe v Wade
Dobbs Sentences #180: Part II D 2
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 1 of 3 Lots of claims in this sentence: “So without support in history or relevant precedent, Roe’s reasoning cannot be defended even under the dissent’s proposed test, and the dissent is forced to rely solely on the fact that a constitutional right to abortion was recognized in Roe and […]
Dobbs Sentences #179: Part II D 2
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 3 of 3 This entire sentence is one claim, but it’s built out of a couple of other claims: “Second, it is impossible to defend Roe based on prior precedent because all of the precedents Roe cited, including Griswold and Eisenstadt, were critically different for a reason that we have […]
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 #176: Part II D 2
Paragraph 1 of 3 Sentence 2 of 2 At least five claims are packed into this sentence: “This vague formulation imposes no clear restraints on what Justice White called the ‘exercise of raw judicial power,’ Roe, 410 U.S., at 222 (dissenting opinion), and while the dissent claims that its standard ‘does not mean anything goes,’ […]
Dobbs Sentences #173: Part II D 1
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 4 of 5 This sentence is two claims: “And today, another half century later, more than half of the States have asked us to overrule Roe and Casey.” The claims: Once we’ve determined whether it is established that the states’ interest in protecting the fetus at all stages translates to […]
Dobbs Sentences #157: Part II C 2
Paragraph 2 of 4 Sentence 1 of 2 This sentence contains two claims: “Defenders of Roe and Casey do not claim that any new scientific learning calls for a different answer to the underlying moral question, but they do contend that changes in society require the recognition of a constitutional right to obtain an abortion.” […]
Dobbs Sentences #150: Part II C 1
Paragraph 6 of 6 Sentence 1 of 4 This sentence is packed with significance—and three claims: “What sharply distinguishes the abortion right from the rights recognized in the cases on which Roe and Casey rely is something that both those decisions acknowledged: Abortion destroys what those decisions call ‘potential life’ and what the law at […]
Dobbs Sentences #139: Part II C 1
The next sentence is a single claim: “Roe and Casey each struck a particular balance between the interests of a woman who wants an abortion and the interests of what they termed ‘potential life.’ Roe, 410 U.S., at 150 (emphasis deleted); Casey, 505 U.S., at 852.” Let’s see what the citations show us. Here’s Roe […]
Dobbs Sentences #135: Part II C 1
Paragraph 3 of 6 Sentence 1 of 3 The next paragraph starts with a sentence containing two claims: “The Court did not claim that this broadly framed right is absolute, and no such claim would be plausible.” The claims: As for the first claim: not only did the Roe and Casey Courts not claim that […]
Dobbs Sentences #133: Part II C 1
Paragraph 2 of 6 Sentence 2 of 3 The second sentence in this section makes two claims based on the previous sentence: “Roe termed this a right to privacy, 410 U.S., at 154, and Casey described it as the freedom to make ‘intimate and personal choices’ that are ‘central to personal dignity and autonomy,’ 505 […]
Cynical Jason 