The Dobbs Decision Panel

On June 29, Georgetown Law's Supreme Court Institute hosted a panel discussion about the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

Introduction:
William M. Treanor
Dean and Executive Vice President,
Paul Regis Dean Leadership Chair,
Georgetown Law

Moderator:
Irv Gornstein
Professor and Executive Director,
Supreme Court Institute, Georgetown Law

Panel:
John J. Bursch
Senior Counsel, Vice President of Appellate Advocacy,
Alliance Defending Freedom

David D. Cole
National Legal Director,
American Civil Liberties Union

Michele Bratcher Goodwin
Chancellor’s Professor of Law,
University of California, Irvine School of Law

Erin Murphy, L’06
Appellate Attorney and Adjunct Professor of Law,
Georgetown Law

[darbymckilkannoncaid]

Michele Goodwin is awesome, she's got such a deep understanding of the history of US law

[kencoport]

Its nice to see two way debate on the issue

[whitneyw.]

It was amazing when David followed up with the lady that said, oh don’t worry you still have equal rights even if you can’t abort your fetus, and David says yeah, I mean you still have equal rights but you’ll be hauled in jail. If you don’t have a baby who will die or who will financially bankrupt you or who could kill you but don’t worry ladies you still have equal rights. This is what your male politicians say. I rarely see such a brilliant exchange

Also, Michelle is incredibly intelligent and just amazing on this topic

[ThePeperich]

Thank you for the panel. I know it is hard, but you have to zoom out to see “which forest” instead of debate about “which tree” and deeply discuss “what kind of tree” and “how to describe leaves”. I hope you see what I mean.

In your discussion was a huge problem from the start. IMHO you thought about the matter itself, the change of a 49y old ruling, impact, problems, etc. and did not see it (so hard it is) as a legal issue: don’t we start every legal constitutional problem with the question, which constitutional body - which branch - has competence to regulate the matter? Executive, legislative or judicial branch?

As we all live and love representative democracy -> the legislative branch. So the people represented by the lawmakers are the decider. SCOTUS added, not the federal (Congress), but the state lawmaker.

There are more question: What is with topics which are federally regulated but have huge impact on this matter. Drugs/Meds, financial aid, health care, regulations regarding hospitals, are private organisations allowed that offer service, do woman have to get information before decision? Some part of federal penal code? What is with abortions on federal ground or native american one?

May be I am too much in continental law, but this is democracy basic law IMHO.

So hard it is, don’t especially law experts see this as all a topic for lawmakers? Sad that lawmakers did not already regulate all and the many more aspects, sad both for woman and whole society. Btw that it is much more risky for women to be pregnant in the USA is no problem of abortion law (as the numbers were bad under Roe, too) it is a problem of the bad US healthcare system for a huge part of the society. But that would be an other topic.

Cheers, Pepe and keep up the great work!

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtraught]

I feel that the topic of Abortion, every judiciary ruling by any court, will be considered wrong by a large population. Given it’s controversy, I feel it’s more fit for legislation returning the power back to the people. The court having such power is worrisome. Roe, reads like court dictatorship. If WE THE PEOPLE want a right, WE vote for that right, we have a process, we can make amendments if WE THE PEOPLE choose.

[AdoraTaylor-rp]

As a black woman, I am more than appalled at this conversation. Are we all just overgrown fetuses? This is what we've come to? We don't know who created these organizations and their true agendas? What races are truly exercising this "right" the most? Please also stop using language such as "on behalf of women"! It is insulting to throw all women, all black people, or all black women into the same category because I, as a black woman, wholeheartedly disagree with the representation of my nature being depicted this way. Again, I normally respect the opinions of those who agree with abortion rights however, this manner is inappropriate.

[njosborne]

A case for Women and Children (bad poetry div.)
A Woman’s body belongs to herself alone.
A child’s body belongs to they, themselves.
A woman’s body does not belong to the church. 
A woman’s body does not belong to the state. 
A woman’s body does not belong to a court. 
A woman’s body does not belong to a  politician. 
A woman’s body does not belong to a relative. 
A woman’s body does not belong to a rapist. 
A woman’s body does not belong to a doctor. 
And never ever should 
A woman’s body belong to a bureaucrat with a big fat Red pen. 
A woman’s body belongs to, she alone and the loving arms of their own American Family . 
A child’s body does not deserve to be victimized by the church. 
A child’s body does not deserve to be victimized by a terrorist with a gun.
A child’s body does not deserve to be victimized by the state. 
A child’s body does not deserve to be victimized by a court. 
A child’s body does not deserve to be victimized by a relative. 
A child’s body does not deserve to be victimized by a politician. 
A child’s body belongs in the loving arms of their Families.
A child’s body and a woman’s body, these must never be victimized
And that concludes today’s lecture, thank you‼️🧬😎🇺🇸

[elisalong]

"If men had to bear this burden, the right to abortion would have been written into law centuries ago." 48:50
This statement is FACT! And it was even said by a man here

[wolfpowers]

The manin the bowtie says things that are impossible to know, then calls it "science." This science is not reality. It is his religion, subject to change whenever it suits him, no different from Abrahamism.

[wolfpowers]

I do not accept the man in the bowtie's scientism. Historically and for centuries, maybe thousands of years, life begins when the first breath is drawn. This has been used in the 20th century, as recently as the 1990s. What has changed? I know a woman who went to prison on the doubt that her child may have drawn a breath rather than been stillborn back in the 1990s. The idea that the spirit is in the breath exists in the language, not the English one, but in other languages.

[whitneyw.]

It’s amazing to me that these pro-life men genuinely think that if fetus at eight weeks is the same as a two year-old child. It’s like they live on a different planet and I think it’s because they’ve never actually stepped back to think,  

“ wow imagine if I personally was pregnant and was feeling nauseous 28 hours a day I was poor and couldn’t work due to the pain and nausea, my landlord called me and told me that me and my toddler child were going to be evicted, and I really don’t want to go through with this pregnancy because I’m in such anguish” Then, literally being arrested by the authorities, and put on trial for murder with the punishment being decades in prison, since it’s “murder”, the same as murdering a two-year-old, so now her toddler will be without a mother or family in the foster care system because this woman didn’t want to let a pregnancy destroy her life. These people are generally just religious zealots..

[gopher]

The guy in the bow tie is awesome. He crushes the arguments of that pro choice dork

[mgabriel]

I am thankfull that Michelle did not discuss the dignity of black women while wearing those glasses.