Why International law sucks (Re: Bombing and terrorism

Nathan Newman nathan.newman at yale.edu
Mon May 17 20:42:07 PDT 1999


-----Original Message----- From: Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol at jhu.edu> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>Yeap. And taking specific historical conditions into consideration. For
>example, abortion rights are guaranteed on the basis of the 14th amendment.

Actually, abortion rights are based on no particular amendment but a declaration by the Court of an "implied" right of privacy, separate from any enumerated rights, so it's more on the order of the 9th Amendment, although its also implied by the right against search and seizure and even right of association.

Or another way of saying it, the Court decided abortion rights were a good thing. Notably, they refused to base the right on gender equality.

But as the debate with Charles implies, the real right to abortion came based on the mass mobilization of women that had already forced Ronald Reagan to sign a strong abortion rights law as Governor a few years before Roe v. Wade. As is common, the Court was ratifying the movement in the streets.

--Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list