LETTER: The Fourth Amendment and forced births

Under the Fourth Amendment, the right of the people to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated. A state statute requiring forced birth is a “seizure” of a pregnant woman’s uterus and its contents by the state, with the woman acting as the unwilling custodian on behalf of the state. This is a fact; no inference is required. The only question is whether this seizure is “reasonable.”

Forced childbirth imposed by the state is “involuntary servitude” to the state, which is forbidden under the 13th Amendment. Again, no inference is required. That aside, the tissue designated “fetus” or “embryo” is part of a woman’s body and was afforded no independent legal standing by the Founders under our Constitution. While some limitations are imposed on other constitutional rights in the interest of public safety, the contents of the uterus are not part of the “public” under our laws.

To exalt the rights of a nonperson over the rights of a person is per se “unreasonable.” While some would impose a quasi-religious ideology to afford legal “personhood” to embryonic human tissue, judicial activism such as that evidenced in the Dobbs decision is not the method our laws set out to accomplish this. Rather, if we want to create a new class of citizens, we should amend the Constitution.

In short, the Dobbs case has nothing to do with the Constitution. It, and forced-birth statutes, are not about protecting “little babies.” They are about marginalizing women — especially minorities and poor people who are unlikely to support GOP candidates. By the way, I am a longtime Republican who still believes in the Constitution and personal freedom.