Why John Roberts's wise prudence was the wrong answer on abortion law

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 15:04, July 20, 2022 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Item |author=Hugh Hewitt |source=The Washington Post |date=June 25, 2022 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/25/john-roberts-chief-justice-dobbs-overrule-roe-abortion-rights/ |quote=No written, explicit protection for abortion rights exists in the Constitution; nor did the court simply anticipate where state legislatures were headed, as it did in the ''Griswold'' case striking down state barriers to contraception or in ''Obergefell'', which established...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) Hugh Hewitt
Source The Washington Post
Date June 25, 2022
URL https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/25/john-roberts-chief-justice-dobbs-overrule-roe-abortion-rights/
Quote
Quotes-start.png No written, explicit protection for abortion rights exists in the Constitution; nor did the court simply anticipate where state legislatures were headed, as it did in the Griswold case striking down state barriers to contraception or in Obergefell, which established the right to same-sex marriage. Nothing remotely approaching consensus developed on abortion because of the fierce, continuing debate about the status of the fetus/unborn child. This freighted argument must be settled, if ever, by elected representatives accountable to voters. Quotes-end.png


Add or change this opinion item's references


This item argues for the position Supreme Court was correct in its ruling on the topic Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

Retrieved from "https://discoursedb.org/w/index.php?title=Why_John_Roberts%27s_wise_prudence_was_the_wrong_answer_on_abortion_law&oldid=33613"