JTFMax:

In a recent statement, conservative justice Clarence Thomas said the Supreme Court should reexamine its birth control and same-sex marriage decisions in 2022 and take new cases that threaten the right to privacy. Several conservative justices have argued for the same outcome.

Justice Clarence Thomas said landmark high court rulings that established gay rights and contraception rights should be reconsidered now that the federal right to abortion has been revoked.

His arguments were based on the logic used by the conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Thomas also suggested that the Court revisit the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling and the Lawrence v. Texas case that protected the rights of married couples to engage in private sex.

The decision to overturn Roe also threatens the rights of gay people and inter-racial couples. It is unclear if the new justices will uphold the rulings or overturn the decision. In the meantime, many people worry that the rulings could be used to overturn other protections in federal law. In Connecticut, the Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz has expressed concern that the order could also affect constitutional privacy provisions.

In an argument to the Supreme Court on Wednesday, conservative justice Clarence Thomas argued that the Due Process Clause is a "legal fiction" on religious liberty, such as the right to contraception. The Court's approach to identifying fundamental rights arguably constitutes policymaking, and it's unclear how the Court would proceed if it decided the issues before it.

One reason to reject this is that the U.S. Constitution does not reference the right to abortion, and the due process clause does not implicitly protect it. Further, the due process clause in the 14th Amendment does not cover abortion. And it is unclear how this reasoning would affect the right to privacy in any other area of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has long acknowledged that the Due Process Clause may be a "legal fiction." Still, the Court has also limited its effectiveness by recognizing that states may impose restrictions on the rights of their citizens. For example, in Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court based its ruling on the "invasion of privacy," a non-textual right protected by the Constitution's matrix of rights and liberties.

With the recent Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, the issue of abortion is back in the news. This decision further challenges the Right to Privacy, the core principle behind overturning anti-sodomy laws and marriage equality. Experts predict that the ruling will have significant implications for both the right to privacy and access to contraception.