Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Deeply Rooted Or Deeply Flawed? A Constitutional Criticism Of Dobbs And Roe's Potential Resurrection, Julian Whitley
Deeply Rooted Or Deeply Flawed? A Constitutional Criticism Of Dobbs And Roe's Potential Resurrection, Julian Whitley
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
Abortion has been a divisive issue in this country for decades. Some believe that abortion should be illegal under any circumstance, others believe that abortion under certain circumstances should be legal, and still others believe that abortion should be legal in all circumstances. The issue of abortion was initially decided by the Court in 1973 under Roe v. Wade, where the Court devised a trimester approach.
Principle Originalism--The Third Way: A Jurisprudential Response To Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Ryan Fortson
Principle Originalism--The Third Way: A Jurisprudential Response To Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Ryan Fortson
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
All judges attempt to decide cases for reasons other than politics or their own personal opinions. But finding a consistent judicial methodology is fraught with peril. Against what it sees as the hyper-textualism of strict constructionism and the unfettered discretion of living constitutionalism, originalism posits itself as the only viable way to achieve an objectively neutral interpretation of the law. This is certainly the stance taken by the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which claims that the Constitution is silent on abortion and that therefore no corresponding right to abortion exists. But there can be different …
Anti-Abortion Statutes As Religious Beliefs, Scott Devito
Anti-Abortion Statutes As Religious Beliefs, Scott Devito
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Justice Alito ruled there is no right, under the U.S. Constitution, for a woman to have an abortion. Since then, eleven states have either enacted or activated statutes that forbid the performance of an abortion. Others may soon follow suit. This Article does not attempt to dispute the reasoning of the Dobbs decision. Instead, it asks whether the eleven state statutes, now construed as constitutionally permitted, are, in fact impermissible intrusions into the constitutionally required separation of church and state. This Article approaches this problem from both a historical and philosophical perspective. First, …