How Originalism in the Court Directly Impacts Americans’ Health and Rights

rePROs Fight Back

In the past month, the Supreme Court has interacted with three cases that have stark implications for the reproductive health, rights, and wellbeing of many across the U.S. Madiba Dennie, author of The Originalism Trap: How Extremists Stole the Constitution and How We the People Can Take it Back and Deputy Editor and Senior Contributor at the legal commentary outlet Balls and Strikes, sits down to talk to us about originalism, the recent Supreme Court case rulings, and what it all means for the sexual and reproductive health and rights of Americans.

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine—which challenged access to nationwide medication abortion—did not have a legal standing. For now, this ruling preserves the post-Dobbs status-quo, protecting access to mifepristone, a safe and common medication used in nearly two-thirds of abortions, in some states. On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Rahimi to prevent those with previous domestic violence restraining orders filed against them to possess firearms. And on June 27th, the Supreme Court dismissed a case that would have prevented abortion in the case of medical emergency in Idaho. Access remains protected—for now. Many of the recent Supreme Court cases are rooted in originalism, or the application of U.S. “history” and “tradition” to undermine rights, which has been a trusted roadmap for anti-rights actors in the courts.

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Email us: [e-mail]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast
Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!