After overturning Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas declared that he has laws protecting homosexual marriage and contraception in his sights.
Thomas urged his fellow judges to reverse earlier decisions that followed the same legal precedent after Friday’s major judgment.
The proposed legal modifications, announced in a concurring opinion of the judgment written by Thomas, would place restrictions on homosexual marriage, same-sex sexual conduct, and women’s access to contraception.
It happens at a time when the Supreme Court controversially decided to overturn Roe v. Wade, a nearly 50-year-old ruling that gave women the right to an abortion under the Constitution.
The court’s longest-serving justice, Clarence Thomas, welcomed the guidelines in a separate opinion published on Friday, but he also pointed out how it only addresses abortion-related rights for Americans.
The 74-year-old judge, a George H.W. Bush appointee, continued by saying the court should reevaluate other instances that fell under prior due process rulings.
Thomas firmly believed that the court should apply the same reasoning to other significant cases because it was determined on Friday that the Due Process Clause of the Constitution does not guarantee a right to an abortion.
He noted three cases in particular, including Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which permitted married couples to purchase and use contraception, and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which permitted same-sex marriage.
‘If the premise of the ruling as released were to be sustained, a whole spectrum of rights are in issue,’ President Joe Biden said of the draft opinion in May, referring to Friday’s 5-4 vote to overturn the 1973 decision. a wide variety of rights.
The president continued, “The concept that we’re going to allow the states make those judgments, let the localities make those decisions, would be a significant shift in what we’ve done.”
On Friday, Biden said that the Roe decision was largely the result of the work of three judges chosen by the previous Trump administration: Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch.
The decision to tip the balances of justice and take away a basic right for women in this nation was made primarily by three justices named by one president, Donald Trump, according to Biden.
The Roe decision’s death may have wider ramifications, according to retiring liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, who also authored the dissent that Justices Elana Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor joined.
After describing how the ruling implies that a “woman has no rights to speak of,” Breyer concluded, “And no one should be certain that this majority is done with its work.”
The right Roe and Casey identified is not sufficient on its own. Contrarily, the Court has for many years connected it to other firmly established liberties concerning family, procreation, and bodily integrity,’ Breyer said.
Breyer, like Thomas, cites Obergefell, the landmark same-sex marriage case, and then Griswold v. Connecticut, which allowed married couples to use contraception without government intervention.
According to Breyer, “They are all woven into the same constitutional fabric, safeguarding individual autonomy over even the most intimate life decisions.”
Justice Samuel Alito, who penned the majority opinion, claimed that the decision only applied to abortion since it was not “deeply anchored in history.”
That is not possible, according to Breyer.
So, one of two statements must be accurate. Either the majority is not genuinely convinced by its own arguments. Breyer remarked, “Or, if it does, any rights without a history dating back to the middle of the 19th century are insecure.
Either the majority’s position is hypocritical, or more constitutional liberties are in jeopardy. One or the other, that is.