Draft abortion opinion leads to speculation around future of contraception, marriage rights


After a draft opinion of the Supreme Court's plan to overturn landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade was leaked, The Guardian says "legal experts believe other laws about individual autonomy may be in danger, including the right to access contraception."
Broad language in an abortion ruling could potentially imperil certain methods of birth control, which "opponents incorrectly say are working as abortion-causing medications," The Guardian adds. That means striking down the right to contraception (Griswold v. Connecticut) could be next, some experts predict.
Wendy Parmet, faculty co-director for the Center for Health Policy and Law at Northeastern University says "[i]f this [draft] opinion becomes the opinion of the court, Griswold is imperiled – no question."
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Additionally, The Washington Post points to speculation that a major abortion restriction could also threaten to "erase decades of activism by the LGBTQ community" on same-sex marriage. Because the draft opinion argues that Roe is a faulty law, The Guardian reports, some analysts think it could rope in other cases based on the 14th amendment, "like Obergefell v. Hodges on same-sex marriage, Loving v. Virginia on interracial marriage, and Lawrence v. Texas on consensual sex."
"Legal experts are divided on whether the right to same-sex marriage is actually in danger," writes the Post, noting that the draft opinion did emphasize that "nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion." Read more at The Washington Post and The Guardian.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Kelsee Majette has worked as a social media editor at The Week since 2022. In 2019, she got her start in local television as a digital producer and fill-in weather reporter at NTV News. Kelsee also co-produced a lifestyle talk show while working in Nebraska and later transitioned to 13News Now as a digital content producer.
-
The Week Unwrapped: Will robots benefit from a sense of touch
Podcast Plus, has Donald Trump given centrism a new lease of life? And was it wrong to release the deadly film Rust?
-
The week's best photos
In Pictures A dancing couple, a new pope, and more
-
How to create your perfect bedscape
The Week Recommends Nighttime is the right time to get excited about going to bed
-
The Supreme Court case that could forge a new path to sue the FBI
The Explainer The case arose after the FBI admitted to raiding the wrong house in 2017
-
ABC News to pay $15M in Trump defamation suit
Speed Read The lawsuit stemmed from George Stephanopoulos' on-air assertion that Trump was found liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll
-
Judge blocks Louisiana 10 Commandments law
Speed Read U.S. District Judge John deGravelles ruled that a law ordering schools to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms was unconstitutional
-
Supreme Court to weigh transgender care limits
Speed Read The case challenges a Tennessee law restricting care for trans minors
-
ATF finalizes rule to close 'gun show loophole'
Speed Read Biden moves to expand background checks for gun buyers
-
Hong Kong passes tough new security law
Speed Read It will allow the government to further suppress all forms of dissent
-
France enshrines abortion rights in constitution
speed read It became the first country to make abortion a constitutional right
-
Texas executes man despite contested evidence
Speed Read Texas rejected calls for a rehearing of Ivan Cantu's case amid recanted testimony and allegations of suppressed exculpatory evidence