LogFAQs > #966070132

All right, finished reading the opinions.

Majority opinion of the court is fucking disgusting as I outlined earlier.

Thomas's concurrence is basically sending the signal to conservatives of where to target next, not that we didn't already know since the GOP has already publicly taken aim at Griswold, Obergefell, Lawrence, Loving, etc.

Kavanaugh's concurrence is him totally attempting to do a PR work for himself full of "We didn't outlaw abortion nationwide!", "We're totally not coming for those other cases/rights! [Not said, but definitely the unsaid feeling throughout the majority opinion: "Today"], "IDK maybe we should have constitutionally protected the right to an abortion in the case of the life of the mother, but eh most states banning it do that so it's probably fine. [Not said: Anything about the already in-place laws that do not]", "Well, personally I think we can't ban you from traveling to another state for an abortion. [Not a controlling opinion here, just riffing. Also nothing about those who can't afford to just do that.]", and "Well, people would be upset however we ruled."

Roberts's concurrence is basically: "Okay, so, when we first granted this case a hearing we were told by Mississippi we were only being asked to decide if all pre-viability restrictions on abortion were unconstitutional and explicitly that finding that some were allowable would not overturn Roe. We should have done that instead of going further than we had to and actually doing that. We should have punted the question of Roe itself down the road. We're rewarding Mississippi for changing their story after we okayed the case when they switched to 'actually we want you to overturn Roe entirely.'" aka Roberts would have further gutted Roe but technically left it in place but as a practical matter it'd probably be open season on it even more than it already was and probably would have delayed this full overturn a year or two.

The dissent points out what a fucking travesty this is - from the fact that the rich and well-off will still be able to get abortions for themselves and their family by going to "'New York [or] California' but to Toronto" (alluding to Kavanaugh bringing up criminalizing traveling between states) to the fact that despite the majority constantly getting defensive about it they very much put Griswold, Obergefell, Lawrence, Loving, etc. in peril by pointing out that the logic they use in overturning Roe rests on their argument there wasn't a right to abortion "deeply rooted in history" until Roe and pointing out the obvious that you could say the exact same thing about those cases too - so either the majority doesn't actually believe it's reasoning or that any "right" lacking a history dating back until at least the mid-19th century (where the majority seems to have drawn its line) is subject to the exact same challenge the majority used to overturn Roe.

They also come hard at the majority's fiction of "we must read the Constitution as it was written at that time" by pointing out that the majority looked at the landscape at the time the 14th Amendment was written and pointing out that at that time it was written and passed by men because women lacked the right to vote and would for another half century and that "We The People" very clearly did not mean all people.

Honestly, this dissent is perhaps the one with the least fucks given I've ever read of these. Like, you can clearly see just how fucking pissed they are with how savage they are in shredding the majority opinions and the concurrences.