ISSUE BRIEF: Reproductive Originalism: Why the Fourteenth Amendment’s Original Meaning Protects the Right to Abortion

Summary

SMU Law Review Forum (Forthcoming 2022)

The conventional wisdom among conservative originalists is that the right to abortion has no basis in the Constitution’s text and history. This Essay demonstrates that this originalist attack on Roe v. Wade and nearly a half-century of Supreme Court precedent is wrong. The text and history of the Fourteenth Amendment, in fact, protect unenumerated fundamental rights, including rights to bodily integrity, establish a family, and reproductive liberty. The right to abortion flows logically from these fundamental rights that the Fourteenth Amendment was written to protect. The Supreme Court should recognize this when it decides this Term’s blockbuster case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a challenge to a Mississippi law banning abortions after fifteen weeks of pregnancy.

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
November 9, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Precedent and Constitutional History Both Support Access to Court When Prison Staff Violate the Eighth Amendment

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Nielsen v....
By: Joshua Blecher-Cohen, David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
November 3, 2026

Inside the Supreme Court case that could decide Title IX employee protections

Higher Ed Dive
CAC’s Miriam Becker-Cohen spoke to Higher Ed Dive about Crowther v. Board of Regents of the...
Civil and Human Rights
November 3, 2026

CAC Release: St. Mary Catholic Parish’s Request to Discriminate Runs Afoul of Constitutional Text and History, As Well As Supreme Court Precedent

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in St. Mary...
By: Joshua Blecher-Cohen, David H. Gans, Praveen Fernandes
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Williams v. Huner

In Williams v. Huner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is considering whether a Pennsylvania prison’s failure to provide a prisoner with rigid neck and wrist braces and effective pain medication violated...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Womble v. Patel

In Womble v. Patel, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is considering whether a North Carolina prison’s failure to provide a prisoner with a hearing-aid battery violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy

In St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Free Exercise Clause requires Colorado to allow religious preschool providers to join its state-funded universal preschool program even though they refuse...