E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
I want to thank Alice for her thoughtful response to my post, and to say that I hope that she is right in her assessment of the Ginsburg interview. As I made clear in my initial post, I do hold Justice Ginsburg responsible for making the statements (after all, they were her words), but I did not nor do I now believe that she is “endorsing the idea of population control” as a justification for abortion rights. Perhaps I should have just been more clear in my own post (and I apologize for any ambiguity) that I find the argument itself offensive and incapable of defense because, as it was framed, it is classist and discriminatory. (Indeed, the argument itself seems to coincide with the justifications for eugenics.) And I think we can all agree that Justice Ginsburg could have been a bit clearer in the interview about who held the “concern” about population control in undesirable populations and who the “some people” were who felt that it would “risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them.” Despite Alice’s helpful response, I am still not 100% certain that I know for sure what Justice Ginsburg is saying in that passage of the interview (though Alice’s interpretation is surely a reasonable one reading it in context). And if Alice is correct about her interpretation, than I suspect that Justice Ginsburg also would find objectionable the argument about population control of undesirable populations as a justification for abortion rights. Posted
9:27 AM
by David Stras [link]