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
The U.S. Bombed a Wedding in Iran. It’s Not the First Time
September 3, 2026
Take Action Now The Iranian Red Crescent Society has asked the International Criminal Court to investigate the U.S. strike, saying that if the…
25 Years Ago, 9/11 Triggered a U.S. Crusade of Torture
September 3, 2026
Take Action Now But in spite of the voluminous evidence that documented high-level approval of methodical torture, not a single U.S. official went to…
Big Tech’s Debate Over “Open” and “Safe” AI Leaves Corporate Power Unquestioned
September 2, 2026
Take Action Now Two seemingly contradictory letters emerging from the AI industry point toward the same future.By Tim Scott, truthout On July 24,…
Venezuela Under Siege: What Should Progressives Do?
September 2, 2026
Take Action Now How should we respond when a government resisting US domination makes compromises that we may oppose, but does so under conditions…




