The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States to bury the right to abortion reactivated speculation about other social conquests, such as contraception and gay marriage , revived by the line of argument of one of the most conservative judges.
“In future files” on respect for privacy, “we should review all the case law ,” conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a personal argument accompanying the decision, referring to three landmark rulings that expanded sexual rights.
Thomas cites the rulings “Griswold v. Connecticut”, of 1965, which enshrines the right to contraception; “Lawrence vs. Texas,” 2003, which declares laws criminalizing same-sex relationships unconstitutional, and “Obergefell v. Hodges Act of 2015, which protects marriage for all nationwide.
According to Thomas, since these jurisprudences are based on the same precept of the Constitution as the one that protected the right to abortion, the Supreme Court has “the duty to “correct the error”” that they established. It would then be necessary to analyze whether other sections of the Constitution “guarantee the endless rights” thus “generated”, he explained.
Demonstration in favor of the right to abortion, in Washington.
This kind of language is just what reproductive rights and LGBTQ rights advocates have been fearing. Abortion rights advocates have repeatedly warned that if Roe fell, the right to contraception and same-sex marriage would be next.
Abortion opponents, who fought decisively to overturn Roe v. Wade, have insisted that they have no interest in trying to undo the right to contraception. But already states like Missouri are trying to restrict access to contraception by banning public funding of certain methods: intrauterine devices and the so-called morning-after pill.
And some Republicans, like Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, say the Griswold case was decided wrong. Earlier this year, Blackburn called Griswold “constitutionally unsound.”
Although it is only the opinion of one of the nine judges that make up the court, the vast majority of six conservatives against only three progressives makes rights defenders fear that several achievements of recent decades, including that of same-sex marriage, will be violated.