“But none of these decisions involved what is distinctive about abortion: its effect on what Roe termed ‘potential life,’” Alito wrote of several related privacy cases. Yet Alito didn’t extend that same differentiation to rulings protecting LGBTQ rights, including Obergefell v. Some commentators said that may telegraph his intention to reconsider those cases and roll back privacy rights in other areas. Stanford law Professor Bernadette Meyler said that despite Alito’s assurances that the birth control cases were different and not at risk, “It seems he’s calling into question the right to privacy.” She noted that the draft said privacy was “unmoored” in the Constitution. Meyler also said the draft doesn’t read like a final opinion, with a tone more like Alito’s dissents. It seems likely other justices will want narrower language that doesn’t call all privacy rights into question, she said.
Read more about how The Chronicle covers politics and what we do to ensure fairness in our reporting
