Normally quiet, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas had plenty of questions and statements on Wednesday during oral arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case that will decide the legality of Mississippi’s 15-week abortion restriction, The Federalist reports.
Thomas asked U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar to tell him where in the U.S. Constitution, exactly, was the language that provides women the right to have abortions.
“Would you specifically tell me, specifically state what the right is? Is it specifically abortion? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?” Thomas asked.
“What is confusing is that we, if we were talking about the Second Amendment, I know exactly what we’re talking about. If we’re talking about the Fourth Amendment, I know what we’re talking about because it’s written, it’s there. What specifically is the right here that we’re talking about?” the normally-subdued SCOTUS justice asked.
“That’s not what this case is about”
Other than saying that the right to abortion comes from the 14th Amendment and relates to liberty, Prelogar was unable to state specifically where the right to end unborn life comes from.
He then asked the principals in the case to compare prosecuting mothers for taking drugs while pregnant with having abortions.
The answer: “That’s not what this case is about.”
Prelogar said later that it was about women “not being forced to continue with a pregnancy, not being forced to endure childbirth, and to have a child out in the world.”
Since when do we say that the natural unfolding of a biological process equates to being “forced”? It’s a ridiculous argument that is completely baseless in the eyes of many.
Thomas’s reasoning appeared to be that Roe v. Wade was a weak legal precedent that couldn’t stand on its own, constitutionally. He continued to ask what the so-called right to abortion rested on, whether it was still the “right to privacy” from the 14th Amendment, or something else.
“I’m trying to get you to tell me what are we relying on now? Is it privacy? Is it autonomy? What is it?” Thomas asked in a vain attempt to elicit a real answer out of any of the pro-abortion liberals arguing the case.
Truth be told: They simply couldn’t come up with any reasonable answer, nor will they ever likely be able to do so.