Dobbs: Two Opposing Views

 Justice Breyer, Sotomayor & Kagan:

They [the Casey controlling opinion] knew that “the legitimacy of the Court [is] earned over time.” They also would have recognized that it can be destroyed much more quickly. They worked hard to avert that outcome in Casey. The American public, they thought, should never conclude that its constitutional protections hung by a thread—that a new majority, adhering to a new “doctrinal school,” could “by dint of numbers” alone expunge their rights.It is hard—no, it is impossible—to conclude that anything else has happened here. One of us once said that “[i]t is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much.” For all of us, in our time on this Court, that has never been more true than today. In overruling Roe and Casey, this Court betrays its guiding principles.

 With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent.  

Now consider law professor Michael Paulsen's praise for Dobbs:

Dobbs may be the most important, magnificent, rightly decided Supreme Court case of all time. It is restorative of constitutional principle. It upholds the values of representative, democratic self-government, and the rule of law, at the same time that it supports the protection of fundamental human rights. It is literally a matter of life and death. It is potentially transformative of American society, for the better. It is a rare act of judicial courage and principle. In every way, Dobbs is a truly great decision.

Here is a link to the article 

 Dobbs is a landmark decision, one that will be debated for many years to come. I'm glad I lived to see it.