Why Roe v. Wade is most likely not in grave danger no matter whom Trump nominates
The writer cites stare decisis, which does not stop judges who think a precedent both seriously mistaken about the constitution and morally deplorable.
And then . . .
Another consideration is this: The court will be reluctant to take away a constitutional privacy right, even if that right was granted with dubious reasonin/abdg.
If Roe were being decided for the first time by the new court, a conservative majority could easily decline to recognize a new privacy right.
However, taking away an already granted, substantially relied-upon right is much harder for the court to do.
Ballocks.
Whistling past the graveyard, he is.
No comments:
Post a Comment