Any justice ready to declare to be a prostitute a constitutional right?

[David Hume]

To be a prostitute may be considered as self autonomy of ones own body. It may even be considered as deeply rooted in history and tradition, since it was allowed in ancient times.

I guess William Douglas may be one to vote yes. Alito would be a no. Roberts likely no, because declaring so would damage the image of SC.

[brucejoel99]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

[Skill and Chance]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

I'm not sure the modern left would even want such a right to be recognized.  Such an expansive ruling could have adverse impacts on sexual harassment and public health laws the modern left strongly favors.  Realistically, COVID probably ended the era of super expansive privacy rights as a left wing legal cause.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I guess William Douglas may be one to vote yes.

For more reasons than one!

[David Hume]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

If SC ever did so, this would be huge, probably even more than Dobbs, as this would strike down all laws banning prostitution. And this would be more unpopular than Dobbs. Even feminists would not want it, as they view prostitution exploitation and objectification of women.

[Sol]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

If SC ever did so, this would be huge, probably even more than Dobbs, as this would strike down all laws banning prostitution. And this would be more unpopular than Dobbs. Even feminists would not want it, as they view prostitution exploitation and objectification of women.

The most avid support for legalized sex work in this country, outside of random horndog dudes, is from feminists. (Though sometimes that Venn diagram overlaps!).

[Donerail]

I guess William Douglas may be one to vote yes.

For more reasons than one!

Douglas was perhaps the only Justice of his era who didn't.

[NewYorkExpress]

Ironically, maybe Kavanaugh or Thomas would be willing to, given their past histories before joining the Supreme Court...

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

If SC ever did so, this would be huge, probably even more than Dobbs, as this would strike down all laws banning prostitution. And this would be more unpopular than Dobbs. Even feminists would not want it, as they view prostitution exploitation and objectification of women.

The most avid support for legalized sex work in this country, outside of random horndog dudes, is from feminists. (Though sometimes that Venn diagram overlaps!).

So is some of the most avid ideological/principled (as opposed to "it just grosses me out") opposition, though.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I dont think such right could ever be justified or supported based off any understanding of the legal history of the last several centuries, so it would have to be a nonsense Kennedy "mysteries of the universe" argument.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

I'm not sure the modern left would even want such a right to be recognized.  Such an expansive ruling could have adverse impacts on sexual harassment and public health laws the modern left strongly favors.  Realistically, COVID probably ended the era of super expansive privacy rights as a left wing legal cause.

Yeah I think one path for the democrats involves becoming more like a european leftist. Very pro social programs + generous welfare benefits, truly universal healthcare but more conservative on abortion, sexuality(sexuality as in actual sex, not sexual orientation), and drug issues

[politicallefty]

I think there's a strong First Amendment case to be made against certain solicitation laws.

[Person Man]

I think that recognition of such a right is a pretty ignored (hence why I don't think even Sotomayor has ever tried to subtly recognize one in dissent) yet possibly likely extension of Griswold if/when a liberal SCOTUS majority is ever again a thing.

I'm not sure the modern left would even want such a right to be recognized.  Such an expansive ruling could have adverse impacts on sexual harassment and public health laws the modern left strongly favors.  Realistically, COVID probably ended the era of super expansive privacy rights as a left wing legal cause.

Yeah I think one path for the democrats involves becoming more like a european leftist. Very pro social programs + generous welfare benefits, truly universal healthcare but more conservative on abortion, sexuality(sexuality as in actual sex, not sexual orientation), and drug issues

Well, either that (though that would be a complete U-turn) or more likely, Democrats are more resourceful. The two major events right now are 1) mixed raced voters shifting their priorities from Civil Rights to Religious and "consumer welfare" (in the Borkian sense as personified in DeSantis) issues and 2) China's string of unnecessary lock downs and genocides, Saudi Arabia's recalcitrance and assassinations, and Russia's military aggression. These two things are important because it opens the door of looking stronger for working people and civil rights by linking trade to human rights, and two deemphasizing immigration.

I think that would take the Democrats in a more "European" direction. Linking trade with civil rights and compromising (if not eventually caving) on immigraton. That would probably win back a lot of voters in places like Montana, Iowa, Minnesota, and maybe some in places like Missouri, Ohio, and Wyoming.