Should Constitutional Rights Reflect Popular Opinion? Interpreting Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization

Datos Bibliográficos

ID22130907
AutoresMary Ziegler (0000-0002-8129-1318, University of California, Davis, autor de correspondencia)
Año2023
Volumen6
Número1
Páginas88-92
Fecha de publicación2023-03-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaModern American History (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 2397-1851 • E-ISSN: 2515-0456
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/mah.2023.6
OpenAlexW4379987170
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas10

In June 2022, the Supreme Court handed down a decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization , which dismantled a fundamental right to choose abortion. A line of Supreme Court decisions dating back to the 1920s recognized unenumerated liberties related to parenting, marriage, and contraception tied to the constitutional right to privacy. Almost half a century ago, in Roe v. Wade , the Supreme Court declared that this constitutional right to privacy was broad enough to encompass the right to terminate a pregnancy. The Dobbs decision reversed Roe and disparaged the right to abortion in the strongest terms: the decision recognizing it was “egregiously wrong” and “on a collision course with the Constitution.”

Abortion · Civil liberties · Constitution · Constitutional law · Constitutional right · Human rights · Majority opinion · Political science · Politics · Pregnancy · Right to privacy · Sociology · Substantive due process · Supreme court · Supreme Court Decisions · The Right to Privacy · Law · Legal Systems and Judicial Processes · Reproductive Health and Contraception · Reproductive Health and Technologies