[Dog Gone]

Thus the stage has been set for the overturning of Roe.

I don't think so.

While Scalia is right that the court overturned its own policy regarding stare decisis, the right to privacy rationale was reaffirmed rather strongly. Taken to its logical conclusion, the court could overturn Roe using the reasoning of today's case, but it would still have to overturn the right to privacy which was the cornerstone of this case.

It's a paradox, but it appears that the court values the latter more highly and probably is free to ignore it's own legal arguments in this case. After all, it's only stare decisis.

[aristeides]

Right to privacy may have been reaffirmed, but it would be quite easy for the Supreme Court to find that right to privacy trumped in the abortion context, if it had a mind to do so. All it would have to do is to find the interest of government and society in the life of the fetus is a compelling interest that supersedes the mother's right to privacy, at least after a certain stage in pregnancy. (It could also find the fetus's right to life trumps the mother's right to privacy, but it would be hard to limit that to merely overruling Roe, rather than finding abortions per se unconstitutional.)