no, but the 4th amendment (which I referenced above) is the usual proxy. Even the most ardent of abortion backers will admit that Roe v Wade is flawed by every

no, but the 4th amendment (which I referenced above) is the usual proxy. Even the most ardent of abortion backers will admit that Roe v Wade is flawed by every measure of judicial practice (which is why the entire line of thought advanced by Roe v Wade has not gotten any traction in any other ruling). Only the fact that it's tied to such a hot-button issue has kept courts from over-turning it. The 4th amendments and all writs law is being broadly interpreted by this judge to give the government the power to effectively enforce a warrant against the entire population of the United States that uses iPhones. Scalia would have been all over that like white on rice.