[jwalsh07]

It doesn't matter what individual states have done. Individual states don't get to define who a person is for the purposes of the 14th amendment - its a constitutional issue.

Really? Will SCOTUS overturn Petersons conviction for murdering his unborn son?

Does the Constituion constrain states from expanding individual rights?

When SCOTUS upheld the non personhood of black folk in Dred Scott, were they correct and within their power to do so?

[Cold Heat]

Really? Will SCOTUS overturn Petersons conviction for murdering his unborn son?

Ya know, this could become a issue for their plate.

If the death penalty is imposed as a result, it might, and I say might, be something they may look at.

They will certainly have plenty of time however. He would not be executed for more than twenty years or so.

[JeffAtlanta]

jwalsh, I'm sorry, but individual states just don't get to define constitutional issues. You might not like it but its reality. Row V Wade may be wrong, but the decision stands until it is reviewed again or overturned by constitutional amendment.

Individual states just can't pass legislation that overrides this - they can try, but they just can't.

[JeffAtlanta]

Really? Will SCOTUS overturn Petersons conviction for murdering his unborn son?

No idea, its a different court now. They just might though. Does the Constituion constrain states from expanding individual rights?

Trick question. Not at the expense of someone else's.

When SCOTUS upheld the non personhood of black folk in Dred Scott, were they correct and within their power to do so?

Doesn't matter - it was still law of the land. An ammendment made that decision moot.