one of the chilling aspects of justice samuel alito’s demeaning decision in dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization is his casual dismissal of the argument that abortion is an equality rights issue for women. according to him: “ … a state’s regulation of abortion is not a sex-based classification and is thus not subject to the ‘heightened scrutiny’ that applies to such classifications.” he proclaims “ … the goal of preventing abortion does not constitute invidiously discriminatory animus against women.” this is a shocking and ridiculous conclusion. how can it be plausibly asserted that denying women access to a medical procedure that fundamentally affects their physical and psychological health and forces them to carry a pregnancy to term with no control over their future plans, is anything but discriminatory against women (including trans-men with female biology)?
advertisement
canada’s roe v. wade is the 1988 decision in r v. morgentaler. it was not argued as an equality rights case. however, justice bertha wilson, the only woman on the bench when the case was decided, understood the sex discrimination inherent in abortion restrictions: “the more recent struggle for women’s rights has been a struggle to eliminate discrimination, to achieve a place for women in a man’s world, to develop a set of legislative reforms in order to place women in the same position as men.”
advertisement