Revision history of "On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a constitutional question emerges: Are women still ‘people’?"

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Diff selection: Mark the radio buttons of the revisions to compare and hit enter or the button at the bottom.
Legend: (cur) = difference with latest revision, (prev) = difference with preceding revision, m = minor edit.

  • curprev 15:47, July 20, 2022Yaron Koren talk contribs 815 bytes +815 Created page with "{{Item |author=Katie Watson |source=Chicago Tribune |date=January 21, 2022 |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-roe-v-wade-dobbs-jackson-abortion-rights-20220121-edqzvpsp7rhttnsszmvzowx4w4-story.html |quote=In its analysis of original intent, the Roe court concluded that the use of the word “person” in the Constitution applies only after birth, in part because none of its 16 uses “has any possible prenatal application.” If the Dobbs c..."