Document Type
Blog Post
Publication Date
2022
Publication Information
2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 13, available at https://journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/2451-2/.
Abstract
From the Post
For nearly 50 years, legal scholars who favor Roe v. Wade’s outcome but scorn its rationale have tried to find firmer footing for a constitutional abortion right. Roe and its follow-on case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, claimed to derive such a right from the Due Process Clause. That proved deeply controversial, for reasons laid out in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Most prochoice critics of Roe would have relied instead on the Equal Protection Clause. Scores of essays on abortion rights have endorsed, developed, and refined the equality arguments over decades. A book of proposals about what Roe should have said is filled with them. A few separate judicial opinions are sprinkled with them. The Dobbs dissent hints at them. But in the end, I think, the equality rationale is only as strong as Roe’s. They rise or fall together.
Recommended Citation
Sherif Girgis,
Why the Equal-Protection Case for Abortion Rights Rises or Falls with Roe's Rationale,
2022 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y Per Curiam 13, available at https://journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/2451-2/..
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1710
Comments
On July 25, 2022, Professor Girgis posted an update to this piece at the following link: "https://journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/wp-content/uploads/sites/90/2022/07/Girgis-14A-and-Abortion-Update-vF2.pdf.">