LISTEN TO DOBBS V JACKSON: PART I
HOLDING: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.
(a) The critical questions is whether the Constitution, properly understood, confers a right to obtain an abortion.
(1) First, the Court reviews the standard that the Court’s cases have used to determine whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s reference to “liberty” protects a particular right.
(2) Next, the Court examines whether the right to obtain an abortion is rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition and whether it is an essential component of “ordered liberty.”
(3) Finally, the Court considers whether a right to obtain an abortion is part of a broader entrenched right that is supported by other precedents.
(b) The doctrine of stare decisis does not counsel continued acceptance of Roe and Casey.
(1) The nature of the Court’s error.
(2) The quality of the reasoning.
(3) Workability.
(4) Effect on other areas of the law.
(5) Reliance interests.
(c) Casey identified another concern, namely, the danger that the public will perceive a decision overruling a controversial “watershed” decision, such as Roe, as influenced by political considerations or public opinion.
(d) Under the Court’s precedents, rational-basis review is the appropriate standard to apply when state abortion regulations undergo constitutional challenge.
(e) Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State form regulating or prohibiting abortion.
ALITO, delivered the opinion of the Court, in which THOMAS, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH, AND BARRETT, joined. ROBERTS filed an opinion concurring in the judgement. BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN filed a dissenting opinion.
