An interesting tidbit was passed along to me today that bears repeating in light of our most recent list discussion on the subject....
Rehnquist, in his dissent from the Roe vs. Wade nooted that the Court must be wrong to find any basis for this right in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, for the simple reason, as he explains, that at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures were in force at the time that the 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868. Moreover, some 21 of these laws were still in effect when Roe vs. Wade was decided. How, then, could they be at odds with the 14th Amendment? In the words of Justice Rehnquist, "To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment." The full text of the Roe vs. Wade decision, including Justice RehnquistÂ’s dissent, can be found at www.priestsforlife.org/government/supremecourt/7301roevwade.htm JDG - QED, Maru.... _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
