Is this the first time SCOTUS has taken away an established Right?

[edhopper]

I know there have been cases where they didn't convey a Right they should have. But have they ever before taken away an established Right?
Not an historian, and not sure if Japanese Internment fits.

[JoeOtterbein]

1. They took away our right...

...to get drunk!

[edhopper]

3. That was Congress

and the States.

[JoeOtterbein]

23. I'll drink to that...

...thanks for the correction!

[Hugh_Lebowski]

4. That was an Amendment first of all, and arguably that didn't take away our right

To drink ... rather, it took away the right to SELL alcohol.

[Best_man23]

2. Its the first time in several decades

The SC historians haven't truly waded in yet, but I'm betting some are quietly comparing the Dobbs opinion to the Dred Scott decision.

[exboyfil]

5. Roberts and Taney

Separated at birth. Roberts will go into the dustbin of history as one of the worst Chief Justices.

[PTWB]

6. I'm not sure...

He voted to save Obamacare when the conservatives were going to end it, and he didn’t vote to end Roe, either. Roberts is a bad Chief Justice but he could be far, far worse.

[exboyfil]

15. He saved the ACA because it was politically expedient

You actually think those anarchists have any desire to actually govern in any meaningful way. He took the hit with the conservatives to ensure they had a punching bag for the GOP going forward. It worked. They played the long game. We lost both Houses for a while and the Presidency (long enough to lock in permanent minority rule).

The only reason he wasn't in full throated support with the other five in Dobbs is his "legacy".

[Scrivener7]

7. I was just going to say Dred Scott did.

[inthewind21]

14. No it didn't

There was no constitutional right for a black person (who by the way wasn't even considered a whole person) in the US to be free in 1857.

[Scrivener7]

19. But his right to be free - and to be freed - in a state where that right existed was removed.

Constitutionally sanctioned or not, there were state laws in both states that should have freed him and his family.

Presumably other slaves were freed when their owners stayed in Wisconsin and Illinois for extended periods.

[Claire Oh Nette]

10. Yes.

Prohibition was a congressional act, then codified with an amendment, then reversed. The Court didn't impose or un-impose anything.

Women lost the right to bodily autonomy, and the right to privacy in their intimate affairs, including family planning, and access to the complete range of female health and wellness care.

[Groundhawg]

8. No, they took away the constitutional right

To own slaves. There probably have been others.

[edhopper]

9. That was an Amendment

Not SCOTUS

[Groundhawg]

12. And that matters how?

It's not like RVW was recognized from the beginning.

[inthewind21]

16. Well it matters

Because a SC decision and a constitutional amendment are two very different things.

[Groundhawg]

20. When it comes to taking rights away

I'm not sure it matters. The right to own slaves was clearly enumerated. Plus, I don't see where the op cared which constitutional rights taken away were due to how they were instituted.
Even the 14th amendment that allows abortion wasn't in the original constitution.

[edhopper]

18. Because

It's not what I am asking. I am asking about SCOTUS not the country.

[Groundhawg]

22. So your asking specifically when

Has the SCOTUS taken away a right that they gave us vs when have the taken away a right codified into the constitution?
I really can't see how that makes a difference.

[TwilightZone]

24. Try reading the thread title.

It's really not that difficult to understand.

"Is this the first time SCOTUS has taken away an established Right"

[Groundhawg]

25. An established right could be one given directly by the constitution.

Or one given by a 50 year old supreme court ruling. What am I missing here?

[Claire Oh Nette]

11. The right to discriminate and segregate in education and other public facilities

Brown ended the racists right to keep their lily white kids away form the local black kids.

Which led to integration and busing, which led to the GOP needing a wedge issue after they lost on segregation.

Long game, indeed.

[FakeNoose]

13. SCOTUS took away the "right" to segregated public schools

... in their decision of Brown vs. Board of Education.

Not sure if that's what you mean though.

[dalton99a]

17. It's about time to take away their rights

Traitors and thieves

[2naSalit]

21. +1

[Voltaire2]

26. Plessy v Ferguson 1896.

Undid the 14th amendment equality requirements and enabled legal segregation. Millions of African Americans lost their rights for decades.

[edhopper]

27. There was already segregation

Plessy could have ended it, but it did the reverse. Separate but equal was the way things were. Now we have legal abortion made illegal.

[Voltaire2]

28. Plessy removed equality from the 14th.

It made segregation legal.

[edhopper]

29. It was already legal

it was already how things were in much of the country. There was no governmental agency trying to end segregation. And the government itself, like the military, was segregated. It wasn't like there was no segregation and then after Plessy, it happened.
Plessy was because the railroads were segregated.The Court confirmed that separate but equal upheld the 14th. It took over 50 years to reverse it.

[Voltaire2]

30. Sure and abortion was already illegal.

Plessy confirmed the power of states to impose segregation.

Dobbs confirmed the power of states to criminalize abortions.

I have no idea why you are insisting that Plessy is not equivalent.

[edhopper]

31. Because

abortion was legal after Roe. The Court said it was a Right. There was no ruling against segregation before Plessy. It was the norm and not challenged by any governmental entity.

Can't see why you don't see the difference.

[Deep State Witch]

32. Dred Scott

I believe the only time that rights were taken away was the Dred Scott decision, but that was for free People of Color.