Denouncing Dobbs and Opposing Judicial Review

32 Pages Posted: 27 Jun 2022 Last revised: 19 Sep 2022

See all articles by Jeremy Waldron

Jeremy Waldron

New York University School of Law

Date Written: June 10, 2022

Abstract

Is there a consistent basis on which an opponent of strong judicial review can criticize the Supreme Court decision (so far just leaked) in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health? This paper argues that there is. Criticizing strong judicial review doesn't mean rejecting the category of unconstitutionality. Now that the Supreme Court is proving itself an unreliable guardian of certain rights, the category of unconstitutionality has to become a topic for ordinary politics. And people--officials and citizens-- have to be willing to act on their own determinations of constitutionality and unconstitutionality without waiting for the guidance of a court.

Keywords: Abortion, constitution, disobedience, Dworkin, neutral principles, politics, rights, strong judicial review, Supreme Court, unconstitutionality

Suggested Citation

Waldron, Jeremy, Denouncing Dobbs and Opposing Judicial Review (June 10, 2022). NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 22-39, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4144889 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4144889

Jeremy Waldron (Contact Author)

New York University School of Law ( email )

40 Washington Square South
New York, NY 10012-1099
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
1,501
Abstract Views
3,568
Rank
19,173
PlumX Metrics