Question

In Dobbs , the Supreme Court overturned Wade under the argument that the 14th think there rights under the 14th Amendment (like Griswold Connecticut Eisenstadt vBaird and Amendment did not expand privacy to include abortion . Following the majority's logic do Lawrence v. Texas)? Why or why not?

Answer 1

The Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs challenges the precedent that the 14th Amendment's right to privacy includes abortion, previously established in Roe v. Wade. While other Supreme Court decisions have protected sexual and reproductive decisions under the right to privacy, it is uncertain if the logic of Dobbs would affect the validity of decisions like Lawrence v. Texas, which protected private, consensual sexual relations under the same right to privacy.

Step-by-step explanation:

Following the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Supreme Court overturned the precedent set by Roe v. Wade, which had established a woman's right to an abortion under the 14th Amendment's right to privacy. In Roe v. Wade, the Court held that this right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment included the decision to terminate a pregnancy. However, in Dobbs, the argument was made that the right to privacy does not encompass the right to abortion.

In cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, Eisenstadt v. Baird, and Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court struck down laws interfering with private sexual and reproductive decisions, indicating that the right to privacy extended to activities within the realm of sexual intimacy and family planning.

Given the majority's rationale in Dobbs, it remains an open question whether decisions such as Lawrence v. Texas would be upheld today, especially in light of the Court's shift away from viewing privacy rights as including the right to an abortion. It could be argued that if the Court does not view a woman's right to choose an abortion as part of the privacy protected by the 14th Amendment, the protection for private, consensual sexual relations could similarly be reexamined, despite the autonomy and liberty principles outlined in Lawrence v. Texas.

Answer 2

No, the Supreme Court's reasoning in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization did not necessarily apply to Lawrence v. Texas. While both cases involve the interpretation of the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause, they involve different aspects of individual liberty.

In Dobbs, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey under the argument that the Constitution does not contain a right to abortion and that the states have a legitimate interest in regulating or restricting access to abortion. The Court held that the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause does not expand the right to privacy to include the right to abortion.

In Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court held that the state cannot criminalize private consensual sexual conduct between adults of the same sex. The Court held that the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment protects the liberty of individuals to engage in private intimate conduct without government intervention.

Therefore, the reasoning in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization does not necessarily apply to Lawrence v. Texas, as they involve different aspects of individual liberty and different constitutional rights.

Step-by-step explanation: