Connect with us

World News

Same-sex marriages, contraceptives at risk after US court’s decision on abortion



Same-sex marriage and the rights to contraception are at risk from conservative judges.

The US Supreme Court’s decision to end the right to abortion, established by Roe v. Wade in 1973, has put at risk other hard-living rights, including same-sex marriage and the right to contraception.

The level of risk depends on which opinion you read. “Nothing in this opinion should be construed as to cast doubt on precedents relating to abortion,” said the majority decision, written by Justice Samuel Alito.

But Justice Clarence Thomas made it clear in an agreed opinion that “future matters” could undermine other rights not explicitly addressed by the 18th-century framers of the Constitution.

“We must reconsider all the examples of due process of this Court, including those of Griswold, Lawrence and Obergfels,” Thomas said, referring to historic Supreme Court decisions legalizing contraception, same-sex intercourse and same-sex marriage. Make. All those decisions established rights that were not explicitly included in the Bill of Rights.

Dissenting judges said Alito’s guarantee could not be taken at face value, and Thomas’ opinion is a clear warning. Ultimately, he said, the right to terminate a pregnancy arose out of the right to privacy established by the contraceptive regime, which led to the recent expansion of LGBTQ rights.

Justice Stephen Breuer, on behalf of the Court’s three liberals, wrote, “No one should believe that this majority is his work.” Other rights now at risk are “all part of the same constitutional fabric, which protects autonomous decision-making over the most personal decisions of life.”

Thomas’ opinion is a “rally cry” for conservatives to begin challenging same-sex marriage “almost immediately,” said attorney Roberta Kaplan, who argued in the historic Supreme Court case that part of the Defense of Marriage Act was overturned. as a result of which the federal government recognized such associations.

Kaplan said the challenges could start with local officials refusing to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples based on religious objections. Kentucky clerk Kim Davis briefly became a conservative darling for trying to do just that in 2015.

“In other words, we are going to see dozens of Kim Davis in the future, all of whom will refuse to recognize the legitimacy of marriage equality in any way,” Kaplan said in an interview. “And one day, sooner or later, one of those cases will end up in the Supreme Court.”

Dissenting judges indicated similar concerns about removing abortion rights from other individual liberties.

“The majority tells everyone not to worry,” Breuer wrote. “It (so it says) can neatly remove the right to choose from a constitutional building without affecting any associated rights. (Think of someone telling you that the Jenga Tower just won’t fall.

(Except for the title, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)