Tag Archives: True
Dobbs Sentences #199: Part II D 3
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 3 of 4 Two claims in this sentence: “According to the dissent, the Constitution requires the States to regard a fetus as lacking even the most basic human right—to live—at least until an arbitrary point in a pregnancy has passed.” The claims: The first claim, again, requires a more thorough […]
Dobbs Sentences #193: Part II D 3
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 5 of 8 Just one claim in this sentence, but five references to check: “The dissent repeatedly praises the ‘balance,’ post, at 2, 6, 8, 10, 12, that the viability line strikes between a woman’s liberty interest and the State’s interest in prenatal life.” The claim without citations: And the […]
Dobbs Sentences #191: Part II D 3
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 3 of 8 Just one claim in this sentence: “These are important concerns.” The claim filled in with information from the last sentence: I’m calling this true.
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 #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 […]
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 #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 #171: Part II D 1
Paragraph 3 of 3 Sentence 2 of 5 This sentence has two claims: “The dissent suggests that we have focused only on ‘the legal status of abortion in the 19th century,’ post, at 26, but our review of this Nation’s tradition extends well past that period.” The claims: As for the first claim, here is […]
Dobbs Sentences #169: Part II D 1
Paragraph 2 of 3 Sentence 3 of 3 This sentence has four claims: “But despite the dissent’s professed fidelity to stare decisis, it fails to seriously engage with that important precedent—which it cannot possibly satisfy.” The claims: The first of these claims is true, expressed in the first section of the dissent: “One piece of […]
Cynical Jason 