[Varda]

I guess it depends on whether you think judges decide fundamental rights or whether fundamental rights exist apart from judges decisions. It seems to me that the end part of his decision suggests he believes the latter in which case his claim that there is a fundamental right to abortion is highly problematical.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

No. What it depends on is whether you believe that Luttig's understanding of the Supreme court refers only to its decision being super-stare decisis or whether his understanding refers to the entire rest of the sentence which includes the language "woman's fundamental right to choose".

I believe that his understanding is of the entire sentence, so I attribute none of the beliefs in the sentence to him.

He could have said something like this but it would have been rather clumsy:

"I understand the Supreme Court to have intended its decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), to be a decision of super-stare decisis with respect to what I understand the Supreme Court to consider a woman's fundamental right to choose whether or not to proceed with a pregnancy."