Alito: "abortion not a Constitutionally-protected right"

[Dr. Strangelove]

[ QUOTE ]
While I certainly agree with Roe v. Wade and think that women should be able to have an abortion, from a constitutional standpoint, it's pretty clear that women don't have a constitutional right to an abortion. Now, whether or not the SC should take a strict constructionist view of the matter is completely different.

[/ QUOTE ]

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

He doesn't believe in the right to privacy either. GWB would not have nominated him if he believed in that right.

[BCPVP]

No human has the right to end the life of another unjustly, so the right to an abortion is not protected by the 9th amendment. I can't use the 9th to say I have a right to your car.

[elwoodblues]

Your response is dependent on defining a fetus as a person. Because the constitution uses the concept of person (individual, etc.) it is well within the responsibilities of the court to define that term. If the court defines it such that a fetus is not a person (as they have, for all intents and purposes) your argument, surprisingly, falls apart.

[BCPVP]

Is it possible that the Court could/has ever be wrong on something (maybe even something as innocous as defining who counts as a person")?

[elwoodblues]

Yes, I think they were wrong in Roe. That doesn't change the fact that your argument was weak.

[elwoodblues]

Could someone who is an originalist (either original meaning or original intent) give a plausible argument that the constitutional meaning of person (or individual, or other similar words) includes a fetus?

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
Your response is dependent on defining a fetus as a person. Because the constitution uses the concept of person (individual, etc.) it is well within the responsibilities of the court to define that term. If the court defines it such that a fetus is not a person (as they have, for all intents and purposes) your argument, surprisingly, falls apart.

[/ QUOTE ]

His argument is not dependent on the status of a fetus. the 9th amendment doesn't imply that he has a write to steal someone's car, or kill a spotted owl, and neither of those are people.

[Jedster]

[ QUOTE ]
Where in the constitution does it say that a woman has a right to end the life of a fetus? Which amendment was that again?

[/ QUOTE ]

There's this thing in the constitution which gives the judiciary the power of judicial review. Then there's these things called amendments, several of which collectively have been found time and time again by judges to establish a right to privacy. And basically what these judges said was that there are limits to governmental power and one of those limits was to tell women whether or not they can have an abortion in the first trimester.

[BCPVP]

So why don't I have the right to "privately" murder someone else?