Mark Small

He was able to get those numbers in part from the chaos of the preceding 10 years or so. He consolidated power rather ruthlessly, but many Russians were happy to be rid of chaos.

How you arrive at what you do, Mark...reminds me of how Roe was argued and why it is vulnerable. No sound foundation.

I just returned from dinner. I'm about to go out on the deck & hope to relax a few before (maybe) rain hits. Roe's foundation is sound. Justice Blackmun wanted to address history & rights & he did both. How I arrive at what I do? Might be a different matter.

Roe became law in early 70s! What renders stare decisis moot? A case which was argued BADLY. I din even do pre law at Cornell, how come I know about this I thought eveyone educated did, and a member of the Bar does not?

Roe was based on rights as recognized in earlier cases. Griswold v Connecticut, a 1965 case, discussed the right to privacy. Hamilton argued against a "bill of rights" for fear ppl would delineate rights we had not. 1/2

I've read a bit farther in our history than the 1970s. Justice Goldberg, in concurrence in Griswold, wrote our right to privacy is protected by the 9th amendment. Read that Amendment & it might augment your undergrad ed'n.

Sigh. Did I take issue with GRISWOLD? I DID NOT. I said, privacy was FINE FOR GRISWOLD. But not for ROE! Go back and read that tweet again!

You relied upon stare decisis & implied it was ignored - somehow - by a 1970s case. Our rights - & the right to privacy is bedrock - are protected. 1/3