From Pine View Farm

Courting Disaster, Conflict of Amendments Dept. 0

At the Hartford Courant, Samuel Teixeira suggests that there is a logical flaw in Samuel Alito’s reasoning in his decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. (Of course, the moral flaw is obvious, but the law and morality are only occasionally related.)

Here’s a bit from hit article:

Sadly, beyond rewriting the history of 1866 and reviving the position originally adopted by the 14th Amendment’s opponents, Justice Alito ignores — and explicitly violates — the original constitutional limits on the Court set forth in the Ninth Amendment. Just 21 words, it reads: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The Ninth Amendment effectively makes unconstitutional just one method of construing — interpreting –– the Constitution: an interpretation that denies or disparages a right because other rights are explicitly enumerated –– listed.

Teixeira’s reasoning is interesting, perhaps even correct, but irrelevant.

Alito’s opinion was not based on logic or reasoning and certainly not on precedent. It was based on dogma, and the arguments he made in it are nothing more than Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes for “because we can.”

(Broken link fixed.)


Comments are closed.