{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0286493860845839, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.825396825396825, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Abortion as an Instrument of Eugenics

Laws banning trait-selection abortion — prohibitions on abortion when had solely because of the race, sex, or specific disability of the child that otherwise would be born — pose a direct challenge to the Supreme Court’s constitutional abortion-law doctrine under Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey: Does the Constitution really confer a right to abortion when had because of the race, sex, or disability of the child that otherwise would be born – that is, abortion for reasons of eugenics? This essay argues that, under Roe and Casey, the answer is yes, but the constitutionally correct answer is no – and this highlights the errors and horrors of the Court’s abortion jurisprudence.