Mirabelli v. Bonta · ¶29

The dissent questions how the Court can adhere to parental-rights precedent after its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U. S. 215 (2022). Post, at 505 (opinion of Kagan, J.). But Dobbs calls into question neither the doctrine of substantive due process nor the other unexpressed rights that the doctrine protects. Applying Glucksberg, Dobbs holds that Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833 (1992), were incorrectly decided because a right to abortion is not “ `deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition' and `implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.' ” Dobbs, 597 U. S., at 231. And because the Court concluded that the stare decisis factors counseled against retaining these cases, Dobbs overruled them. Id., at 263–290. It does not follow from Dobbs that all our substantive due process…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.