{"title":"宪法权利应该反映民意吗?解读多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案","authors":"Mary Ziegler","doi":"10.1017/mah.2023.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In June 2022, the Supreme Court handed down a decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which dismantled a fundamental right to choose abortion. A line of Supreme Court decisions dating back to the 1920s recognized unenumerated liberties related to parenting, marriage, and contraception tied to the constitutional right to privacy. Almost half a century ago, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court declared that this constitutional right to privacy was broad enough to encompass the right to terminate a pregnancy. The Dobbs decision reversed Roe and disparaged the right to abortion in the strongest terms: the decision recognizing it was “egregiously wrong” and “on a collision course with the Constitution.”","PeriodicalId":36673,"journal":{"name":"Modern American History","volume":"5 1","pages":"88 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should Constitutional Rights Reflect Popular Opinion? Interpreting Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization\",\"authors\":\"Mary Ziegler\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/mah.2023.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In June 2022, the Supreme Court handed down a decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which dismantled a fundamental right to choose abortion. A line of Supreme Court decisions dating back to the 1920s recognized unenumerated liberties related to parenting, marriage, and contraception tied to the constitutional right to privacy. Almost half a century ago, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court declared that this constitutional right to privacy was broad enough to encompass the right to terminate a pregnancy. The Dobbs decision reversed Roe and disparaged the right to abortion in the strongest terms: the decision recognizing it was “egregiously wrong” and “on a collision course with the Constitution.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":36673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Modern American History\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"88 - 92\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Modern American History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/mah.2023.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern American History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/mah.2023.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
2022年6月,最高法院做出了多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案的判决,废除了选择堕胎的基本权利。追溯到20世纪20年代,最高法院的一系列判决承认了与养育子女、婚姻和避孕有关的未列举的自由,这些自由与宪法隐私权有关。近半个世纪前,在罗伊诉韦德案(Roe v. Wade)中,最高法院宣布,这项宪法隐私权的范围足够广泛,足以涵盖终止妊娠的权利。多布斯案的判决推翻了罗伊案的判决,并以最强烈的措辞贬低了堕胎的权利:该判决承认堕胎是“极其错误的”,而且“与宪法相冲突”。
Should Constitutional Rights Reflect Popular Opinion? Interpreting Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
In June 2022, the Supreme Court handed down a decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which dismantled a fundamental right to choose abortion. A line of Supreme Court decisions dating back to the 1920s recognized unenumerated liberties related to parenting, marriage, and contraception tied to the constitutional right to privacy. Almost half a century ago, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court declared that this constitutional right to privacy was broad enough to encompass the right to terminate a pregnancy. The Dobbs decision reversed Roe and disparaged the right to abortion in the strongest terms: the decision recognizing it was “egregiously wrong” and “on a collision course with the Constitution.”