The chief justice is now interested in "moving forward." But Roberts earlier explained that the court was ignoring a "fundamental principle" in Dobbs — and that has consequences.
Roberts is only interested in maintaining the Court’s legitimacy so the majority can continue to undermine democracy and our rights without public controversy. This is what they have been doing for his entire tenure as Chief Justice. They have been consistently and systematically denying remedies for violations of rights as they did in Vega v. Tekoh. Dobbs was only different because the majority opinion expressly denied the existence of what had been previously accepted as a legitimate right. It’s harder to differentiate from other decisions when you consider that if you cannot claim the protection of the law when your rights have been infringed upon then the result is also a denial of the existence of the right. Or, at the very least, a denial of the importance of protecting that right.
Roberts is only interested in maintaining the Court’s legitimacy so the majority can continue to undermine democracy and our rights without public controversy. This is what they have been doing for his entire tenure as Chief Justice. They have been consistently and systematically denying remedies for violations of rights as they did in Vega v. Tekoh. Dobbs was only different because the majority opinion expressly denied the existence of what had been previously accepted as a legitimate right. It’s harder to differentiate from other decisions when you consider that if you cannot claim the protection of the law when your rights have been infringed upon then the result is also a denial of the existence of the right. Or, at the very least, a denial of the importance of protecting that right.