Abstract
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org’n, the U.S. Supreme Court, both the majority and dissenting justices, employed comparative law. For some of the justices in the majority, this reflected a change from their prior rejection of comparative law in United States courts. However, a review of the majority’s approach to comparative law reveals flaws in their analysis – in particular, a failure to appreciate the broader context surrounding comparative sources. As state courts now take the lead in considering cases relating to abortion, they have the opportunity to develop more nuanced and accurate approaches to comparative law.
Recommended Citation
Davis, Martha F.,
IN CONTEXT: FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ABORTION LITIGATION,
64 Santa Clara L. Rev.
393
(2024).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview/vol64/iss1/9
Archival Accessibility Statement
This item was created or digitized prior to May 1, 2026, or is a reproduction of legacy media created before that date. It is preserved in its original, unmodified state specifically for research, reference, or historical recordkeeping. In accordance with the ADA Title II Final Rule, the Law Library provides accessible versions of archival materials upon request. To request an accommodation for this item, please submit an accessibility request form.
