His opinion is only on whether laws are or can be argued as constitutional.
Your anger should be at the members of the house/senate for not codifying abortion rights into an amendment for 35 years after Roe v Wade passed, not at the people judging if we made rules for that yet.
rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, (…) must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition”
which 1) as I already said, flies in the face of the 9th Amendment, and 2) means that if you take this to its logical conclusion, that Americans can never decide anything is a “right” that didn’t exist at the time of our country’s founding.
Stop carrying water for these theocratic fascists.
His opinion is only on whether laws are or can be argued as constitutional.
Your anger should be at the members of the house/senate for not codifying abortion rights into an amendment for 35 years after Roe v Wade passed, not at the people judging if we made rules for that yet.
My anger is at the fucking asshat who said this
which 1) as I already said, flies in the face of the 9th Amendment, and 2) means that if you take this to its logical conclusion, that Americans can never decide anything is a “right” that didn’t exist at the time of our country’s founding.
Stop carrying water for these theocratic fascists.
Did you read his opinion? He states why he doesnt think that Roe and Casey decisions apply to the 9th and 14th.
ALSO, why would you call a supreme court judge a fascist? It doesnt make any sense. Its like calling a police a fascist for doing their job