No video

Courthouse Steps Decision Webinar: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

  Рет қаралды 7,123

The Federalist Society

The Federalist Society

Күн бұрын

On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court decided Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In a 6-3 decision, the Court reversed and remanded the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, holding that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; that Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey are overruled; and that the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.
Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court. Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh filed concurring opinions. Chief Justice Roberts filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan filed a dissenting opinion.
Featuring:
Allyson Ho, Partner and Co-Chair, Constitutional and Appellate Law Practice Group, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Moderator: Dean Reuter, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, The Federalist Society
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

Пікірлер: 141
@catsaresocute650
@catsaresocute650 2 жыл бұрын
I would like the proponents of that position to explain in detail why the argument that the state can arbitarte somomes body to the usage of (a persumed) other person, even for the sake of survival, is not slavery or the loosing of a fundermental liberty
@catsaresocute650
@catsaresocute650 2 жыл бұрын
I would also want to know why the deepest history and tradtion seems to be occationaly found in a time before the USA existed, but then can't find that this tradtion is the one of the philosophy of liberty of the individual as per Locke. Or if that is so, can't recognice that the right to ones own person is central to the case for natural rights.
@catsaresocute650
@catsaresocute650 2 жыл бұрын
I would also like to ask if the speakers ever considered what to do with a law that prohibits one from exercising personal autonomy over ones own self. Assuming human nature, of the one that leads to liberty, isn't is natural to disregard it? Isn't this obvious in the way restrictions of abortion do not lower the rates of abortion? Isn't it clear that it is no accident that now rights as the freedom to travel, even inter-state travel have to be reconsiderd to accmedate the position? Isn't it clear that by making or agreeing to a law against the nature of freedom, you will end in more and more restrictions to liberty?
@jahnkejustin429
@jahnkejustin429 2 жыл бұрын
I'm happy to take in your question. Our society recognizes that States have what is called a general police power, meaning they can enact any law so long as it is not arbitrary or prohibited by the state or federal constitution. The protection of fetal human life unquestionably falls within the police power, and the Supreme Court decided that there is no federal constitutional right to abortion. Abortion restrictions do not amount to slavery in the case of consensual sex for obvious reasons--pregnancy following sex is a natural and foreseeable consequence of the woman's volitional acts. It is a biological reality, not a governmental imposition. Similarly, if you cause an accident, you can't claim that being forced to pay damages is slavery. There is a colorable slavery argument with respect to pregnancy following rape, but that issue has not been brought to the Court. It is not clear, however, that the 13th Amendment was originally understood to address this situation. That would need to be fully argued. As far as other policy arguments you raised, those should be addressed to the legislatures. Federal courts have no constitutional authority to make policy decisions for the nation, past precedent like Griswold and Roe notwithstanding.
@catsaresocute650
@catsaresocute650 2 жыл бұрын
​@@jahnkejustin429 The imposition of the state (or you) that it is in iteself even possible to agree to surrender the autonomy over your body is impossible. It is a foundational liberty and therefore can not be given over to the state. This is the enitre point of natural rights. If you think hat you can agree to loose natural rights, then any democracy would have the right to take any number of natural rights, becuase you agree by citiennship to the process of goverment. That makes deomcratic goverment in the sense of a republic impossible. If you could agree to loose your right to speak freely, for example you would have not lost one inch of your right to it, because this right is inherent to your person. That is becuase you are sentient, you can think, becuase you have (a body) a voice and hands you can speak and right. Threfore the act of expression and speach is inherent to your person, your right, becuase you posses your person. Natural rights can not be possed by anoyone but the person who is in the possetion of them. They refer to ownership of the self. That owenrship of the self is the foundational argument for freedom and the right to self-goverment.
@catsaresocute650
@catsaresocute650 2 жыл бұрын
@@jahnkejustin429 You can not calim that paying damages is slavery, bceause it is a limited part of your property you are paying on gorunds of an issue of the socitey you are in having democraticly decided on laws. The distinction is (limited part of) poeperty and your person. If you had to pay for an accident with your personhood, you would indeed be in a state of slavery.
A Seat at the Sitting: The December Docket in 90 Minutes or Less
1:25:07
The Federalist Society
Рет қаралды 15 М.
Пройди игру и получи 5 чупа-чупсов (2024)
00:49
Екатерина Ковалева
Рет қаралды 4 МЛН
Gli occhiali da sole non mi hanno coperto! 😎
00:13
Senza Limiti
Рет қаралды 19 МЛН
Courthouse Steps Decision: NRA v. Vullo
1:00:35
The Federalist Society
Рет қаралды 9 М.
In Re Stephen Glass: Oral Arguments
1:08:00
CaliforniaCourts
Рет қаралды 25 М.
MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT | April 2022 Special Session
1:49:51
Hillsdale College
Рет қаралды 28 М.
Necessary & Proper Episode 87: Current & Future Uses of the Impeachment Power
1:03:03
Congress and the Future of Agency Authority
1:00:00
The Federalist Society
Рет қаралды 19 М.
December 01, 2020 Supreme Court Morning Session
2:29:15
SupremeCtofPAOfficial
Рет қаралды 21 М.
Пройди игру и получи 5 чупа-чупсов (2024)
00:49
Екатерина Ковалева
Рет қаралды 4 МЛН