The Future of Abortion Law — Hadley Arkes on The Daily Signal Podcast
In “The Future of Abortion Law,” James Wilson Institute Founder and Director Hadley Arkes joins Richard Reinsch on The Daily Signal Podcast to discuss abortion jurisprudence.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
The Next Pro-Life Goal Is Constitutional Personhood
Josh Hammer and Josh Craddock outline the path ahead for the pro life movement at the Federal level, as legislators act to prevent our nation becoming “a house divided against itself.”
Selective History in the Dobbs Dissent
JWI Affiliated Scholar Justin Dyer criticizes Justice Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case. However, he also appreciates that the dissent does not exclusively rely on historicism.
Did The Dobbs Decision Go Far Enough? — The Federalist Radio Hour
James Wilson Institute Founder and Director Hadley Arkes joins Emily Jashinsky on The Federalist Radio Hour to explain why the Dobbs opinion did not go far enough.
“What Comes After Roe” – Gerard V. Bradley
Today, the Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that “the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Roe and Casey must be overruled.” Almost fifty years after handing down its calamitous abortion decision on January 22, 1973, SCOTUS has finally corrected the biggest mistake it ever made.
After Dobbs: The End of the Beginning
James Wilson Institute Founder Hadley Arkes reflects on the overturn of Roe v. Wade.
Samuel Alito’s Prophetic Vision
Senior Scholar David Forte praises Samuel Alito’s courage, as demonstrated by his draft opinion for Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
A Post-Roe Legislative Agenda for Congress
Josh Craddock, Affiliated Scholar and alumnus of the James Wilson Fellowship, explores the best courses of action for pro-life congressmen to take after the overturn of Roe v. Wade.
The Consummate Statecraft of Samuel Alito
I have to confess that when the news broke last night and I read that careful, exhaustive, impressive opinion from Justice Alito, my eye moved to those key points for which I was looking, and there I fell into a mild despair. For the Justice preserved, as one of the defining strands of his opinion, …
Once More Unto the Breach: Arkes v. Whelan on the Overruling of Roe
In a response to Ed Whelan’s critique of “On Overturning Roe,” Prof. Arkes insists that the moral argument against Roe is the only logical one for judges who believe in the deep wrong of abortion. The pro-life cause rests on objective moral truths, not on value judgments, and as a result does not require judges (as Whelan claims) “to read their own moral convictions into the Constitution.”
