No, Brett Kavanaugh, Overturning Roe v. Wade Is Not “Neutral”

Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for the upcoming case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, where the court will decide if Mississippi’s fifteen week abortion ban is constitutional. Many see it as a case that could completely overturn Roe v. Wade, especially conservatives and anti-abortion activists.

Brett Kavanaugh — who told the Senate that he would not overturn Roe v. Wade — clearly tried to come in with what he thought was a compromise. First, Kavanaugh makes the point — framed through a hypothetical critic of the Supreme Court ruling on abortion — that the Constitution makes no mention of abortion:

. . . The Constitution is neutral on the question of abortion, the text and the history, [they would argue] that the Constitution’s neither pro-life nor pro-choice on the question of abortion, and they would say, therefore, it should left to the people, to the states, or to Congress.

First off, the lack of something being mentioned in the Constitution does not equal it not being Constitutionally protected. The Ninth Amendment to the Constitution specifically states:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.