The Supreme Court should "rethink" gay marriage and access to contraception, Justice says after Law overthrows Roe vs Wade
In a 6-3 decision on Friday, the court ruled in favor of Mississippi in the case of Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, banning most miscarriage after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Allowed and rejected Roev. Wade.
Judge Clarence Thomas writes that the same reason behind the reason for not having the right to abort can be used in other cases.
Judge Samuel Arito wrote in a majority opinion that this decision "should be understood to cast doubt on precedents unrelated to abortion." In his agreed opinion, Thomas agreed.
He added that the court should reconsider other cases that fall under the precedent of the court's previous legitimate proceedings.
"Therefore, in the future, we need to revisit all the precedents of this court's substantive legitimate proceedings, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell," writes Thomas. ..
These three groundbreaking cases mentioned by Thomas, which protected access to contraception and allowed same-sex relationships and marriages, rely on the same legal reasons as Law.
At Roe, the right to personal privacy protected by the Due Process clause included the right to decide whether to give birth.
Thomas writes that "substantially legitimate process decisions are" clearly wrong. "
He added: The rights created by the litigation of our substantive legitimate process. '
' The recognized correct Roe and Casey are not independent, "writes Judges Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
"On the contrary, courts have linked it to physical integrity, family relationships, and other resolved freedoms, including childbirth, for decades, most notably pregnancy. The right to end is directly derived from the right to buy and use contraceptives. "
No comments:
Post a Comment