The Supreme Court draft ruling overturning Roe v. Wade raises just as many arguments and counterarguments as the original ruling that Justice Samuel Alito excoriated in his opinion, leaked this week to Politico.
The Constitution doesn’t specifically spell out a right for interracial couples to marry.
Under Alito’s rationale, all those supposedly settled issues, widely accepted as basic rights, now could be subject to challenge.
Alito argues the opposite, saying that this draft ruling applies only to the rights of the unborn.
These are painful words to parse in such a literal way when talking about humans’ lives, but that’s the standard Alito himself is setting.
It appears that the majority only seeks a literal interpretation of the Constitution when it suits conservative justices’ political or religious beliefs.
A court whose politics overshadow reasoned constitutional interpretation is a court whose legitimacy deserves all the public scrutiny it’s now receiving. »