← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (Abortion rights 2022)

No. 3:18-cv-00171 SCOTUS · Decided Teaching/Historical SCOTUS
Decided: Sep 21, 2022
Court
Supreme Court
mssd
Judge
Carlton W. Reeves
Decided
Sep 21, 2022
Filed
Mar 19, 2018
Judge (CL)
Carlton W. Reeves
Filed (CL)
Mar 19, 2018
CL Status
terminated

Case Overview

In 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and ruled that the Constitution does not protect the right to abortion, meaning states can now ban or allow it as they choose. The case wasn't about the Tenth Amendment or federalism — even though that's how politicians framed it after the fact — it was purely a constitutional question about whether the right to privacy under the 14th and 9th Amendments covers the right to an abortion. The Court said no, and the 'leave it to the states' framing was political messaging, not a holding of the case.

Legal Issues

Tenth AmendmentFederalismConstitutional RightsPrivacyAbortionStates' Rights

BrynoDC Coverage 1 video


The Facts

Mississippi enacted a law banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, directly challenging the viability standard established by Roe and Casey. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Mississippi's only abortion clinic, challenged the law. The Court accepted certiorari and ultimately overruled Roe outright.

The Issue

Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional

Whether Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey should be overruled

The Rules

Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process

Stare decisis, when to overrule precedent

Deeply rooted in history and tradition standard for unenumerated rights

The Application

History

Applying the historical-and-traditions test, the Court found that Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban involved a right (abortion) that was neither recognized at the Founding nor protected throughout American history, thus failing to qualify as fundamental under the Due Process Clause. With abortion reduced to rational-basis review rather than a fundamental right subject to strict scrutiny, Mississippi's asserted interest in protecting potential life clearly satisfied constitutional scrutiny. The ruling returned abortion regulation entirely to the states, permitting even complete bans that would have been unconstitutional under Roe's viability framework.

The Conclusion

**Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade, holding the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion.** The Court rejected nearly 50 years of precedent grounded in Fourteenth and Ninth Amendment privacy protections, returning abortion regulation to the states.

SCOTUS TMR-62b33ca8 May 28, 2026

Cited By (14)

  • Trump v. Anderson addresses whether Colorado can remove a presidential candidate from the ballot based on the 14th Am…

  • The case concerns whether the government can exclude a noncitizen spouse from entering or residing in the United Stat…

  • The case addresses whether federal law requiring hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment to pregnant patients conf…

  • United States v. Skrmetti is a case concerning whether state laws restricting gender-affirming medical treatments vio…

  • Hamm v. Smith SCOTUS

    The case addresses whether stare decisis should prevent the Court from restoring the original meaning of the Eighth A…

  • Trump v. Anderson addresses whether Colorado can remove a presidential candidate from the ballot based on the 14th Am…

  • The case concerns whether the government can exclude a noncitizen spouse from entering or residing in the United Stat…

  • The case addresses whether federal law requiring hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment to pregnant patients conf…

  • United States v. Skrmetti is a case concerning whether state laws restricting gender-affirming medical treatments vio…

  • Hamm v. Smith SCOTUS

    The case addresses whether stare decisis should prevent the Court from restoring the original meaning of the Eighth A…

  • Alexander v. S.C. State Conference NAACP (22-807)

  • Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (22-451)

  • Trump v. United States (23-939)

  • United States v. Skrmetti (23-477)

Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support