- The Supreme Court overturned previous abortion rights set in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on Friday.
- In a concurring opinion, Justice Thomas said the court should reconsider rulings involving contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.
- “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.”
In a concurring opinion with the Supreme Court’s Friday ruling to overturn the precedent set in Roe v. Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas said the court should reconsider rulings that protect access to contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.
The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday, with Justice Samuel Alito penning an opinion in favor of Mississippi in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health.
The decision eliminates the standard set in Roe, which is allowed until about 24 weeks of pregnancy, otherwise known as viability, the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb.
Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion that the court should examine other cases that fall under the Court’s previous due process precedents.
“For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergevel,” Thomas wrote.
The Due Process Clause ensures any American has the right to due process before someone can take away their inalienable rights.
Concurring opinions are court opinions that agree with the majority opinion of the Supreme Court, but acknowledge differing reasons for coming to the same conclusion. The opinion is not a binding precedent, unlike the majority opinion.
The Griswold v. Connecticut decision was decided in 1965, when the Supreme Court decision in a 7-2 decision that people have the right to privacy granted by the Bill of Rights that protects against state restrictions on contraception. If overturned, states would be granted the ability to outlaw various forms of
In 2003, the Supreme Court decided in a 6-3 vote in the Lawrence v. Texas case that making it a crime for members of the same sex from having intimate sexual relations violates the due process clause.
“Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his opinion.
Lastly, the high court decided in 2015 in the Obergevel v. Hodges case that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the rights of same-sex couples to get married in the same ways that opposite-sex couples can.