The real Supreme Court endgame for abortion foes.

The Supreme Court's Role in Abortion Polarization

The article contends that the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade, while seemingly a victory for anti-abortion advocates, has actually deepened the national divide. The expected compromise and reduced polarization haven't materialized, with states enacting sweeping abortion bans and engaging in legal battles over travel and abortion access.

The Fetal Personhood Movement

The core argument focuses on the long-standing fetal personhood movement within the anti-abortion movement. This movement, far from being a mere tactic, has served as a unifying force for decades, seeking constitutional protection for the unborn. The author highlights that personhood arguments are not simply about banning abortion but encompass broader beliefs about race, sex, motherhood, and religious views.

• Personhood has been a fluid concept, changing meaning across time and reflecting broader societal beliefs.
• It has been used to challenge the notion that those previously marginalized have the most urgent claim to constitutional redress.
• Advocates for personhood have sought to reshape how history and tradition are interpreted in constitutional law.

Implications of Fetal Personhood

The article warns that achieving fetal personhood would have wide-ranging legal implications beyond abortion, affecting the court's approach to equality in issues involving race, sex, and sexual orientation. It emphasizes that the Dobbs decision, while seemingly a final victory, represents merely the beginning of a longer battle over the meaning of personhood and equality.

Conclusion

The author concludes that the anti-abortion movement's goal goes beyond simply eliminating the right to abortion; it aims to redefine personhood and equality in ways that could fundamentally reshape legal landscapes. The Dobbs decision, therefore, marks not an end, but a new phase in this ongoing conflict.