-
Where Are They Now? Here's What 'Disaster Girl' Zoe Roth Has Been Up To Since Her Childhood Photo Became A Meme -
Why Are 'Warhammer' Fans So Hyped About 'Astartes 2?' The Long-Awaited Sequel To The '40K' Fan Film Explained -
'How Do I Get Him Off' Meme Creator Reveals Why 'Mr. Washee Washee' Was Stuck To His FL Studio Project And How He Finally Removed Him -
Who Is 'Dank Demoss' And Why Is She Suing Lyft? The Memes About The 400-Pound Rapper's Lawsuit Explained -
Michelangelo Was Only 26 When He Started David, But Young People Today Have Lots To Show For Themselves, Too
-13
Support My Argument
Uploaded by lb89 Jun 30, 2022 at 02:46AM EDT
roe v wade supreme court sex abortion
Origin Entry: 2022 Supreme Court Overturning of Roe v. Wade
File type: jpg
Resolution: (679px x 578px)
File size: 46.5 KB
More:
-13
2022 Supreme Court Overturning of Roe v. Wade - Support My Argument
| ◄ Previous | View Gallery Random Image | Next ► |
![Matt Ford @fordm In a solo concurring opinion, Thomas says the court should reconsider rulings that protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage. Cite as: 597 U. S. (2022) 3 THOMAS, J., concurring 381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain con- traceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Oberge- fell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex mar- riage), are not at issue. The Court's abortion cases are unique, see ante, at 31-32, 66, 71-72, and no party has asked us to decide "whether our entire Fourteenth Amend- ment jurisprudence must be preserved or revised," McDon- ald, 561 U. S., at 813 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). Thus, I agree that "[n]othing in [the Court's] opinion should be under- stood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abor- tion." Ante, at 66. 19 For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, includ- ing Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any sub- stantive due process decision is "demonstrably erroneous," Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to "correct the error" established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. (2019) (THOMAS, J., con- curring) (slip op., at 9). After overruling these demonstra- bly erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myr- iad rights that our substantive due process cases have gen- erated. For example, we could consider whether any of the rights announced in this Court's substantive due process cases are "privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Amdt. :](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/002/392/454/11f.png "Justice Clarence Thomas Suggests Overturning Gay Marriage")
Comments (9)
Add a Comment
Image Details
2,725 views (5 from today)
Uploaded Jun 30, 2022 at 02:46AM EDT
Origin Entry
Source
Tags
About the Uploader
lb89
Cataloger & Commentator
Top Comments
Triplem Moderator
Jun 30, 2022 at 03:54AM EDT
ImperatorZor
Jul 01, 2022 at 06:57PM EDT