I am not lying but your intelligence is certainly at issue. Why? Because what I quoted from isn’t from the dissent. Hell the paragraphs are numbered. What else do you need other than to follow the numbers? Mazes? Pop ups?
The majority opinion ENDS in paragraph 112. Paragraphs 110-112 are the concluding paragraphs of the majority opinion.
“110
The judgment of the District Court as to intervenor Hallford is reversed, and Dr. Hallford's complaint in intervention is dismissed. In all other respects, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. Costs are allowed to the appellee.
111
It is so ordered.
112
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.” Paragraph 113 begins a concurrence by Justice Stewart.
“113
Mr. Justice STEWART, concurring.
114
In 1963, this Court...”
The majority opinion by Blackmun begins on paragraph 1 with the introduction of who deliverered the majority opinion.
“Mr. Justice BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court.
1
This Texas federal appeal and its Georgia companion, Doe v. Bolton,
410 U.S. 179, 93 S.Ct. 739, 35 L.Ed.2d 201, present constitutional challenges to state criminal abortion legislation. The Texas statutes under attack here are typical of those that have been in effect in many States for approximately a century. The Georgia statutes, in contrast, have a modern cast and are a legislative product that, to an extent at least, obviously reflects the influences of recent attitudinal change, of advancing medical knowledge and techniques, and of new thinking about an old issue.”
I quoted from numbers between 1 and 112
“100
1. A state criminal abortion statute of the current Texas type, that excepts from criminality only a life-saving procedure on behalf of the mother, without regard to pregnancy stage and without recognition of the other interests involved, is violative of the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment.
77
This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the
Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is”
Rehnquist’s dissent begins at 122.
“122
Mr. Justice REHNQUIST, dissenting.
123
The Court's opinion brings to the decision of this troubling question both extensive historical fact and a wealth of legal scholarship. While the opinion thus commands my respect, I find myself nonetheless in fundamental disagreement with those parts of it that invalidate the Texas statute in question, and therefore dissent.”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113
I didn’t quote from Rhenquist’s dissent.
You do realize the numbers 70 and 100 come between 1 and 112, placing the quoted material I cut and pasted within the majority decision.
You’re wrong and embarrassingly so. You’re no lawyer. No paralegal either. Sure as hell aren’t a mathematician.
