Page values for "A terrible, horrible, no good, very bad Supreme Court decision"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
"_pageData" values
1 row is stored for this pageField | Field type | Value |
---|---|---|
_creationDate | Datetime | July 20, 2022 3:16:30 PM |
_modificationDate | Datetime | July 20, 2022 3:16:30 PM |
_creator | String | Yaron Koren |
_fullText | Searchtext | {{Item |author=Harry Litman |source=Los Angeles Times |date=June 26, 2022 |url=https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-06-26/roe-vs-wade-dobbs-supreme-court-samuel-alito |quote="What is distinctive about abortion," Alito writes, is that it results in the termination of a "potential ... |
_categories | List of String, delimiter: | | Items |
_numRevisions | Integer | 1 |
_isRedirect | Boolean | No |
_pageNameOrRedirect | String | A terrible, horrible, no good, very bad Supreme Court decision |
_pageIDOrRedirect | Integer | 14,289 |
_lastEditor | String | Yaron Koren |
_pageID | Integer | 14,289 |
_pageName | Page | A terrible, horrible, no good, very bad Supreme Court decision |
_pageTitle | String | A terrible, horrible, no good, very bad Supreme Court decision |
_pageNamespace | Integer | 0 |
"Opinions" values
1 row is stored for this pageField | Field type | Allowed values | Value |
---|---|---|---|
Topic | Page | Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization | |
Position_fragment | String | Supreme Court was correct in its ruling | |
Position | Page | Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization / Supreme Court was correct in its ruling | |
Position_link | Wikitext | ||
Stance | String | for · mixed · against | against |
"Items" values
1 row is stored for this pageField | Field type | Value |
---|---|---|
Author | List of Page, delimiter: , | Harry Litman |
Source | Page | Los Angeles Times |
Date | Date | June 26, 2022 |
URL | URL | https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-06-26/roe-vs-wade-dobbs-supreme-court-samuel-alito |
Quote | Text | "What is distinctive about abortion," Alito writes, is that it results in the termination of a "potential life." And so it does. That is the core difficulty that makes abortion doctrine so vexing — both the individual and society have vital interests at stake. But Alito's leap from that truism to the conclusion that the right to abortion merits no constitutional protection rests on an embarrassing flaw in legal reasoning. It is a non-sequitur to say that the existence of a state or societal interest in fetal life means there is no individual interest in whether to bring a fetus to term. A countervailing state interest says exactly nothing about the existence of an individual right. |
Summary | Wikitext | A terrible, horrible, no good, very bad Supreme Court decision by Harry Litman (Los Angeles Times, June 26, 2022) (view) |