segregation was disallowed under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, which is much sounder law (and much more likely to be respected by an origin

segregation was disallowed under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, which is much sounder law (and much more likely to be respected by an originalist since it's pretty obvious what they meant and once you make a black person a person under the law (which is also done by the 14th amendment) it's pretty clear you can't treat them differently than anyone else). Conversely, Roe V Wade relies on some pretty tortured reinterpretation of the right to privacy, which in itself is only kind of guaranteed by a less tortured interpretation of other parts of the constitution. It's also pretty important to point out here that things are only for the states to decide in so far as you guys haven't made an amendment to make that right part of the constitution. The whole point of this is you can't make up rights that aren't there as the supreme court, you aren't the legislative body. If you want more/different rights there is an amending process to change the constitution and then the supreme court will be bound to uphold your changes as well. Also, why do I know more about your constitution and governing structure than you appear to? I'm not American, I just appreciate how straightforwardly you guys recognize government will always screw you over and needs to be agressively restrained. I just wish you had realized it was all large organizations and more effectively applied your restrictions to corporations as well.