What’s that you smell in the Supreme Court? | TheHill

There is no problem with changing one s rationale for reproductive rights, or even changing one s views on constitutional interpretations; that is part of honest intellectual development. However, the mere fact that a case is constitutional precedent  or even super precedent,  according to some is no substitute for constitutional principle.

Breyer and Sotomayor are known for their often profound, detailed opinions. I expect both will ably defend reproductive rights in Dobbs, even if they do not defend the actual analysis in Roe. But Roe should stand or fall on constitutional merits not on feigned outrage over changing constitutional precedent.

via thehill.com