Given that the supreme court ruling in Dobbs relied on right wing justices declaring that the 14th amendment should only apply in ways that the authors could ha

Given that the supreme court ruling in Dobbs relied on right wing justices declaring that the 14th amendment should only apply in ways that the authors could have predicted in the mid-19th century, it seems quite reasonable to be skeptical of the 14th amendment's ability to adequately prevent gender discrimination; it was, after all, passed at a time when women lacked very basic rights and it's unlikely that the authors would have intended or predicted it affording equal rights to women. In particular the argument that the 14th amendment guarantees only those rights that are "deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition" and "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" opens an enormous potential for future rulings that undermine gender (and other forms of) equality. Doesn't seem very mind boggling to me.