Leaked Supreme Court Draft Opinion On Women Drivers
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2022 8:22 pm
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
№ 867–5309
GREG ABBOTT, GOVERNOR OF TEXAS, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. AUSTIN TAXI, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CACCIATORE TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
For the first 180 years after the adoption of the Constitution, each State was permitted to address this issue in accordance with the views of its citizens. Then, in 1969, this Court decided Jack v. Jill, which conferred a woman’s right to obtain a driver’s license, even though the constitution makes no mention of female drivers and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision. This Court justified its ruling with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, a provision held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution provided that any such right is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.”
In conclusion, we hold that Jack v. Jill must be overruled. Jack was an abuse of judicial authority from the start. The Constitution makes no reference to women drivers, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision. Countless studies confirm the risk to innocent lives. The defense’s argument that women need the ability to drive in order to work outside the home is an affront to this Nation’s values; like driving, a woman’s so-called ‘right to work’ is not mentioned in the constitution and is the subject of a forthcoming opinion of this Court.
