JohnFrim wrote:
From what I have read of RBG's take on Roe v Wade it is not that it was unconstitutional, but rather that a ruling based on "equality" for women was a stronger argument and less susceptible to further debate than the ruling based on "privacy." RBG was still supportive of a woman's right to decide on abortion, rather than a State legislature; and she had concerns of the negative consequences of overturning RvW.
How could it be an argument from an equally for women standpoint when ONLY women can have abortions? It's not as if men can have abortions.