[scook]

First, what you refer to is absolutely a legal opinion. There is no stated right to privacy, per se, but yes, it can be reasonably inferred from the 4th and 5th amendments, where it’s a reasonable application.

Your argument is what the left has come up with to discredit the decision. The problem with the argument is that it conflates the “right” to kill babies (if they aren’t yet viable outside the womb) with unreasonable search and seizure and self incrimination. A logical progression of that reasoning is that when grandpa gets to where he needs help getting his food, maybe bathing and dressing (even though he’s still a vital source of wisdom for his adoring grandchildren), if he’s too much trouble, kill him.

The destruction of reasonable privacy protection by this ruling is an argument by liberals to try to gain support for resistance - fomenting panic in their base to motivate them.