Roe as Humphrey's Executor, Morrison as Casey, Slaughter as Dobbs |
Casey attempted to save Roe by rewriting it, but that compromise ultimately collapsed in Dobbs. Morrison attempted to save Humphrey's Executor by rewriting it, but that compromise will (likely) collapse in Slaughter.
Josh Blackman | 12.16.2025 4:26 PM
The Supreme Court's abortion jurisprudence can be plotted as three primary points: Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The line between these precedents was not straight. Indeed, Casey effectively rewrote Roe; Casey abandoned Roe's trimester framework; Casey found that the state has "legitimate interests" from the outset of pregnancy to protect both the health of the woman and the life of the fetus; Casey abandoned Roe's application of strict scrutiny to protect the "fundamental" right to abortion. In dissent, Justice Scalia rebuked the majority for preaching fidelity to stare decisis while rewriting precedent. He famously wrote, "I confess never to have heard of this new, keep-what-you-want-and-throw-away-the-rest version." Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter tried to "call[] the contending sides of a national controversy to end their national division by accepting a common mandate rooted in the........