She observed that the "right to privacy," was heavily leaned on in the decision Roe v. Wade. From a feminist perspective, would it be more beneficial to cite the equal protection clause, as it pertains to gender?
Even from a practical standpoint, grounding precedent in the equal protection clause is surely a better way to ensure permanence than grounding it in a "right to privacy," which is not explicitly in the Constitution, and for better or worse, is not even recognized as legitimate by some judges.
From my understanding, it seems that the equal protection clause could certainly be used in cases like Roe v. Wade. However, I am not sure that it would be more beneficial to use the equal protection clause over something like a right to privacy. You make a good point that there is grounding precedent in the equal protection clause which may be better than finding new grounds for a ruling of each new case that is presented. However, I feel as though it would be important to not abuse the equal protection clause, a topic like abortion is not just about equality, we all know it is about much more than that. The equal protection clause may be very helpful, however it is important to also use it only when needed.
ReplyDelete