Justice Thomas does not hold back in concurring opinion to overturning Roe v Wade, leftists sure to explode

If the Supreme Court’s historic decision to reverse Roe v. Wade is enough for activists to promise a “night of rage,” one must wonder what they’ll do when they read the solo concurring opinion from conservative Justice Thomas Clarence who believes the court should now “reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.”

These rulings, as many on Twitter are already pointing out, protect contraception, same-sex sex, and same-sex marriage.

As American Wire News reported, the Supreme Court ruled Friday on Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case that called into question Mississippi’s right to ban abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

A lower court had prevented the state’s law from being enacted, so Mississippi took it to SCOTUS.

In a critical part of the ruling, the Court stated, “The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion: Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”

In a solo concurring opinion appearing on page 117 of the explosive decision, Justice Thomas took a closer look at the Due Process Clause, previously used to support the notion that abortion is a Constitutionally-protected right.

“I join the opinion of the Court because it correctly holds that there is no constitutional right to abortion,” he wrote. “Respondents invoke one source for that right: the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee that no State shall ‘deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.’ The Court well explains why, under our substantive due process precedents, the purported right to abortion is not a form of ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause. Such a right is neither ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’ nor ‘implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.'”

“I write separately to emphasize a second, more fundamental reason why there is no abortion guarantee lurking in the Due Process Clause,” the justice continued. “Considerable historical evidence indicates that ‘due process of law’ merely required executive and judicial actors to comply with legislative enactments and the common law when depriving a person of life, liberty, or property… Other sources, by contrast, suggest that ‘due process of law’ prohibited legislatures ‘from authorizing the deprivation of a person’s life, liberty, or property without providing him the customary procedures to which freemen were entitled by the old law of England.'”

“Either way,” Thomas wrote, “the Due Process Clause at most guarantees process. It does not, as the Court’s substantive due process cases suppose, ‘forbi[d] the government to infringe certain ‘fundamental’ liberty interests at all, no matter what process is provided.”

“Because the Due Process Clause does not secure any substantive rights,” explained Thomas, “it does not secure a right to abortion.”

Thomas stressed that the Court was not asked to weigh in on the Fourteenth Amendment or on the application of the Due Process Clause “in other, specific contexts,” and the decision to reverse Roe v. Wade should not “cast doubt” on any precedents “that do not concern abortion.”

“For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas stated. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous’… we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”

Not surprisingly, the liberal left is apoplectic.

“It’s clear the Court’s assault on fundamental rights will not stop with abortion,” tweeted woke advocate Kimberlé Crenshaw. “They are coming for contraception, LGBTQ rights, gay marriage next. Combined with the GOP dismantling of voting rights, we are on the brink of autocracy. Democrats must act.”

“Everyone who told me I was hysterical and paranoid to say that they’re gonna make being gay illegal again owes me a hundred f***ing dollars,” stated Victoria Scott.

And U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) tweeted in all caps, “IT IS LONG PAST TIME TO LISTEN TO THE ALARMISTS.”



Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Melissa Fine


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles