We lost far more than the right to abortion with the Dobbs debacle

[unblock]

We lost the right to privacy

The right wing of the court ignored the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, 13th, and 14th amendments, never mind original intent (the founders understood abortion as legal and commonplace) to make their decision.

But as noted in the opinions, they did not merely revoke the right to abortion. The entire notion of a penumbra of privacy upon which numerous other rights rest was eliminated.

This goes beyond even other rights already noted, such as interracial marriage, gay marriage, private sex acts, and birth control.

The entire notion of privacy rights is gone. Look for this court to eviscerate any precedent regarding privacy rights, and to take a very narrow view of 4th amendment protections.


It's about women's rights, yes.
It's about lgbtqia rights, yes.

But it doesn't even stop there.

This affects everyone in ways even republicans can't fathom.

[LonePirate]

1. HIPPA is dead as well. The right definitely doesn't realize that.

[Volaris]

2. Yep.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

3. Point is well taken, but one that you mentioned

to whit, Loving, was decided based on Equal Protection as opposed to Privacy.

Convenient for a certain member of the Court, isn't it?

But ... I think offhand Obergefell was also decided on similar grounds.

We stand to lose more, but I'm not as worried about various marriage rights as I am about the others.

[unblock]

6. Thomas specifically noted obergefell in his concurring opinion

I'll have to recheck loving, I assume you're right. Also safe to assume that in any event Thomas would sooner compromise his "principles" than invalidate his own marriage.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

8. He may have, but we know he's not the sharpest ...

I'll also have to look it up to be sure, but intrinsically it seems far more logical to use Equal Protection, as was used in Loving, when the matter is, essentially, pretty damn similar in both instances. Marriage confers certain privileges, and is also not a private matter. Equal Protection makes more sense to me as the valid argument in that case.

But I'm not ... ya know ... Obama, or anyone even close

[unblock]

12. I don't disagree in terms of "correct" constitutional analysis

But the right wing isn't sincere in terms of its constitutional analysis.

Really it boils down to this:

A 6-3 majority can decide whatever the f it wants.

[rsdsharp]

4. I agree with your position. I sort of understand what you are saying

with respect to the 13th Amendment. But I fail to see how the 3rd figures in this.

[unblock]

9. The third amendment was part of the penumbra of privacy

It specifically prevents the quartering of soldiers in private homes, but the idea of the "penumbra" was that a general privacy right is clearly implied by the several amendments noted.

Why else would they ban the quartering of soldiers if not because your home is a private space and not for the arbitrary use of the government.

But now you have no constitutional right to grow an herbal abortifacient and consume it in your own home....

[unblock]

10. The 13th wasn't so much to do with privacy, but

they did have to ignore that one as well on order to say the constitution permits gestational slavery.

[keithbvadu2]

5. Ask Thomas, Kav, and Barrett if interracial marriage is settled law.

Ask Thomas, Kav, and Barrett if interracial marriage is settled law.

[dalton99a]

7. If Americans don't have privacy rights, then neither should the Ayatollahs on the court

[Hortensis]

11. NO. It's clear that the right to privacy is targeted but we still have it.

It's a huge umbrella on which so many enormous rights depend, not JUST the right to abortion.

It's loss would be unmistakable -- it'd take over cable discussion and there'd be hysterical posts here claiming a RW conspiracy to force white people to have more babies, death panels, we're all now slaves, etc. The usual, but about the right to privacy.

[unblock]

13. The dobbs opinions made it pretty clear.

I don't mean to imply that no aspect of privacy exists at all. The 3rd and 4th amendments still exist, for instance. But this court will take very narrow views of those protections.

There's no longer a general constitutional right to privacy, but there still is a constitutional protection against search and seizure. But if abortion is illegal, look for the court to say the government can do all sorts of things that we would consider invasions of privacy in order to enforce abortion laws.

Such as perhaps, scouring text messages for any hint of a miscarriage and using that as probable cause to turn a house upside down looking for any abortifacient or medical receipt....