Latest Breaking News

Everything is on the line. The commonalities are adults making personal decisions about who they love and about their sexual behavior, including contraception.

Alito referenced a 12th Century Christian monk and a 16th Century witch-hunting British jurist, and — in a not at all final smack down of non-fanatics — threw Roe back to the 50 states, letting “States’ Rights” rear its ugly head once again. Thomas, in his concurrence, must have looked in a mirror before deciding to leave Loving vs Virginia out.

So what's to stop another court from going after other unenumerated rights by employing the same legal framework that was used to overturn Roe v. Wade?
Justice Samuel Alito for one tries to allay that concern in the lead Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization opinion, taking care to distinguish abortion from other rights, only to have Justice Clarence Thomas pull the rug out.

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote in concurrence. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’ we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
For court watchers, almost as notable as the hit list of cases the conservative justice explicitly names was the one he left out. Loving v. Virginia — which in 1967 established a right to interracial marriage — was cited by every other opinion in the Dobbs case when discussing substantive due process.

https://www.courthousenews.com/thomas-didnt-mention-interracial-marriage-and-thats-worth-talking-about/