Editing Griswold v. Connecticut (section)

===Right to abortion overturned, 2022===
On June 24, 2022, the majority opinion in ''[[Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization]]'' written by Justice [[Samuel Alito]] limited the right to privacy to exclude the right to an abortion. In Justice [[Clarence Thomas]]' concurrence, he argued, "In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including ''Griswold'', ''Lawrence'', and ''Obergefell'', ... Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous' ... we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents," referring to decisions on contraception, sodomy, and same-sex marriage as future cases for the Supreme Court to reverse.<ref name="Sneed 2022">{{cite news | url = https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/politics/abortion-ruling-gay-rights-contraceptives/index.html | title = Supreme Court's decision on abortion could open the door to overturn same-sex marriage, contraception and other major rulings | first = Tierney | last = Sneed | date = June 24, 2022 | access-date = June 24, 2022 | publisher = [[CNN]] | archive-date = June 24, 2022 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220624174858/https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/politics/abortion-ruling-gay-rights-contraceptives/index.html | url-status = live }}</ref> Broadly, Justice Thomas does not believe in [[substantive due process]] and has referred to it as 'legal fiction'.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Robin |first=Corey |date=2022-07-09 |title=The Self-Fulfilling Prophecies of Clarence Thomas |url=https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-self-fulfilling-prophecies-of-clarence-thomas |access-date=2024-06-11 |magazine=The New Yorker |language=en-US |issn=0028-792X}}</ref> In regards to [[unenumerated rights]], the majority opinion also said, "The abortion right is also critically different from any other right that this Court has held to fall within the Fourteenth Amendment's protection of 'liberty'."<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-analysis-roe-wade.html|title=The Dobbs v. Jackson Decision, Annotated|newspaper=The New York Times|date=June 24, 2022|access-date=June 27, 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite court |date=24 June 2022 |litigants=Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization |vol= 597 |reporter = U.S. |opinion = ____ |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf |access-date=24 June 2022 }}</ref>

The dissenting opinion criticized the majority for overturning precedents dating back to ''Griswold'', and argued, "And no one should be confident that this majority is done with its work. The right ''Roe'' and ''Casey'' recognized does not stand alone. To the contrary, the Court has linked it for decades to other settled freedoms involving bodily integrity, familial relationships, and procreation. Most obviously, the right to terminate a pregnancy arose straight out of the right to purchase and use contraception. In turn, those rights led, more recently, to rights of same-sex intimacy and marriage. They are all part of the same constitutional fabric, protecting autonomous decisionmaking over the most personal of life decisions ... So one of two things must be true. Either the majority does not really believe in its own reasoning. Or if it does, all rights that have no history stretching back to the mid-19th century are insecure. Either the mass of the majority's opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other."<ref name="Sneed 2022"/><ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/597/19-1392/|title=Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U. S. ____ (2022)|website=Justia|date=May 16, 2021|access-date=June 27, 2022}}</ref>