Unelected judges shouldn’t have the power to take away rights most Americans support.
By Farrah Hassen, LA Progressive
Regardless of anyone’s views on abortion, the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson took away a reproductive right that a half-century of hard-fought judicial precedent had determined was constitutionally protected.

In doing so, the court set a dangerous precedent — that a person’s rights can be taken away.
Overturning Roe v. Wade was a triumph of politics and ideology over constitutional principles. It diminished the power and equality of women, along with transgender men and non-binary people, to make informed decisions about their own bodies without fear of government intrusion.
The opinion itself fails as an application of long-standing constitutional law. The justices arbitrarily discarded precedents they opposed, like Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, threatening the role of precedent in ensuring legal stability.
They selectively reasoned in Dobbs that abortion law should be left to the states, but conveniently did not grant that same level of deference when they declared a New York law unconstitutional for limiting concealed weapons.
Recent Posts
Yes, we should be challenging Zionism in schools
August 7, 2026
Take Action Now Is Zionism simply a desire for Jewish self-determination and statehood in an ancestral homeland? Or is Zionism a colonial project to…
ICE Killing in Maine Shows Why Vets Need Vetting—And Not Just in Politics
August 7, 2026
Take Action Now The killing of Johan Sebastian Duran Guerrero exposes the dangers of rushed hiring, inadequate screening, militarized policing, and…
Abdul El-Sayed Just Said the Quiet Part Out Loud
August 6, 2026
Take Action Now View this post on Instagram A post shared by NoKings (@no_kings_usa)By Abdul…
An Evening with a Minuteman
August 6, 2026
Take Action Now The Mixed Metaphors and Messages at VandenbergBy Scott Fina, The Intercept Back on May 20, I had an opportunity to watch an…




