Idk and yes. In the past I’ve done attempts at researching stuff in depth, One notable examples come to mind in high school where I attempted to read the entire U.S. constitution (that I did do) and research each amendment and the articles and try to really understand the whole thing. It was very hard for high school. I failed at it. I can probably try and find some other stuff but besides going down a random rabbit hole I come across I haven’t done anything close to serious legal research. I think an issue there is overreaching. My projects are usually way to big for me to handle. I never thought of coming up with smaller things to research about.
I would say that interest was kept constant for about a year and then mid-pandemic I stopped following stuff. I pick up interests very easily and kept changing stuff. I think I’m more or less settled on law and philosophy because those are the two interests I keep coming back to and I feel the least friction with.
I think I can do both but
Law I want to do, but coding I’m less interested in. I don’t feel like I’ve been forcing myself to do it but I did pick it up due to you giving me the option. If you recommend the topics in the last 5 years I’m glad to focus on that if you think there good. I do want to finish my current coding assignment before moving on.
What are the the topics you covered in the last 5 years?
Does going in-depth into Roe v. Wade sound fine for now? If so how do you want me to start. Hmm. I guess my goal is going in-depth into the reasoning behind their decisions.
Ok. I took that as to go ahead and try at least. So I went through the Wikipedia article. All quotes are from there unless I note otherwise.
The parties appealed this ruling to the Supreme Court. In January 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision in McCorvey’s favor holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a fundamental “right to privacy”, which protects a pregnant woman’s right to an abortion.
Hmm. Maybe this is why many conservatives I’ve heard over the years claim that abortion is a made up constitutional right. The right to abortion is not found written anywhere in the constitution (true), so they claim that this analysis is bad/it is made up because the Due Process Clause doesn’t say that.
I know that an issue in Constitutional law is reading it, so the claim that it is a made up law is, I think, unfair. I know the commerce clause says:
and that it is a big reason as to how the federal government/congress got so much power. However, that only came about due to interpretation/reading by judges. While certain lawyers may disagree with how it get interpreted and its current scope, I don’t hear language as strong as “its made up”. Or maybe I missed it. Idk
Then again the commerce clause does say “regulate commerce” and then that regulation power got very far. That is different from interpreting the constitution says something about abortion when its not written anywhere.
However, it also held that the right to abortion is not absolute and must be balanced against the government’s interest in protecting both women’s health and prenatal life.
Hmm. Idk if they had any strong legal reasons for this. I feel like it was probably more so done because of their personal feelings of abortion. I do kinda agree with the sentiment of the law beinf made up here. It went from interpreting a part of the constitution as saying you have the right to abortion to then giving specific details about abortion. I don’t know how the right to privacy interprets into don’t abort in the last trimester.
It resolved these competing interests by announcing a pregnancy trimester timetable to govern all abortion regulations in the United States.
So this was the legal origin of the trimester thing? I heard there’s some issues with the trimester view. I forgot what.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe was among the most controversial in U.S. history.[8][9]Roe was criticized by many in the legal community,[9][10][11] including some who thought that Roe reached the correct result but went about it the wrong way,[12][13][14]
Interesting. So it wasn’t just a sentiment of Rands and other people at the time who agreed with abortion had issues with it.
To just get a general overview of the case. I could probably find more strictly legalish sources. I just chose Wikipedia out of habit.
Oh yeah I didn’t make it clear that I intended to go over a bit more on the wiki. I just got tired and posted what I had done and didn’t share I intended to do more.
Go over the Supreme Court decision part in the wiki and just write down any big reasoning points they had for their decision and my thoughts with it. After that maybe look at some other resources.
I could read the original opinion Roe v. Wade | 410 U.S. 113 (1973) | Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center. I’m just avoiding it out of a habit I got from school I think. English teachers always told me to read books or you won’t pass. That’s false because they all care about the same big points. In my experience people tend to do better with just using a tool that just give the main points. You can end up missing what is considered important to the teacher (or just in general) by reading it by yourself.
It depends on your goals. Looking at stuff yourself and figuring out the main points as well as or better than the people who do tools/summaries is a potential goal. That enables helps enable innovation and potentially disagreeing with the experts. An alternative goal would be to quickly and easily get a mainstream opinion about a topic.