Subject: Re: balance in the Texas abortion law
There's a similar court case in Kentucky. But the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that people DO NOT have the right to self-determination under the U.S. constitution. Why? Because hypothetically, a right to self-determination "could license fundamental rights to illicit drug use, prostitution, and the like."

But the Supreme Court clearly got it wrong in Dobbs when they applied the very low standard of "rational basis review" to abortion laws. Strict scrutiny is needed when judging laws that affect people's healthcare decisions.

Making healthcare decisions is a fundamental right, and so any law restricting one's healthcare decisions should meet strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny requires the law be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest. The much lower standard of "rational basis review" (rational speculation unsupported by evidence or empirical data) is not enough, as shown by the failure of the Texas law to protect the interests of pregnant women.

For example, blood transfusions are not deeply rooted in the America’s history and tradition, and so blood transfusions are not a fundamental right. Texas could outlaw blood transfusions. But healthcare decisions are a fundamental right, and so Texas has to meet strict scrutiny when outlawing blood transfusions. People's rights do not change based on advancements in medical science. A new medical procedure might not be deeply rooted in tradition, and laws restricting new procedures should be judged based on the unchanging fundamental right to make one's own healthcare decisions.

=== links ===
A pregnant woman in Kentucky sues for the right to get an abortion, December 8, 2023
"The suit, filed in state court in Louisville, says Kentucky’s near-total prohibition of abortion violates the plaintiff’s rights to privacy and self-determination under the state constitution."
https://apnews.com/article/abo...

They argued that prostitution is a constitutional right. Nice try, said federal court, January 18, 2018
"American courts continue to recognize that private sexual activity is a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution."
"There is no constitutional rights to engage in illegal employment, namely, prostitution," Judge Jane A. Restani wrote for the three-judge panel... The court conducted what’s known as a "rational basis review" of the anti-prostitution statute, meaning it examined whether the anti-prostitution law had a legitimate purpose, then asked whether the law promoted that purpose. The prostitutes’ claims fell short on both questions, the Ninth Circuit found. The state had good reasons for outlawing prostitution, including discouraging human trafficking and violence against women, and the law was tailored to address those reasons, Restani wrote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Privacy Rights Under the Constitution: Procreation, Child Rearing, Contraception, Marriage, and Sexual Activity, September 14, 2022
"A line of Supreme Court cases establishes that the U.S. Constitution guarantees a person’s ability to make certain decisions... In the 1997 decision Washington v. Glucksberg, the Court held that assistance in committing suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest protected under the Due Process Clause. The Court declared that fundamental liberties are those "deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition."... If a liberty interest is deemed a fundamental right, the challenged law or government action must generally satisfy the most stringent standard of judicial review: strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny requires the government to justify the law by demonstrating that it serves a compelling government interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest (the law is not too broad or too limited). If a liberty interest is not considered fundamental, a court generally need only apply the rational basis test; the law or government action must be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose. For instance, as addressed in Dobbs, rational basis review applies to abortion restrictions because abortion is not a fundamental right."
https://crsreports.congress.go...

The Strange, Grisly History of the First Blood Transfusion
"The French parliament, the Catholic Church, and the Royal Society soon passed their own bans on blood transfusions, and the procedure ceased to be used in mainstream medicine until the mid-19th century."
https://www.britannica.com/sto...