Rehear Dobbs and blame Alito and his ordering of liberty

The opinion of the Court in Dobbs relies on the morality of abortion and the term "ordered liberty." The question is on the meaning of that term.  In short, how is liberty to be ordered? Who orders it?  At heart, the argument of Dobbs and the pro-life movement relies on the presumption that ordered liberty comes from God and, because they believe abortion is immoral, that the right to abortion cannot be divinely sanctioned so cannot be considered a right. 

Justice Alito does not go into the concept of how liberty should be ordered or who ordered it, so his bias is either unconscious or unstated. The argument for rehearing should explore that point and seek rehearing based on this issue. This demand probably has to wait until the majority on the Court has changed, but the age of Justice Thomas and his possible difficulties related to January 6th may have that shift be sooner than later.

Justice Barrett certainly holds the same bias. In her case, the argument needs to be made that, should she again be pregnant, it may be under a circumstance where such pregnancies are regulated and their loss investigated by the civil authorities. Raising that question, which was silent in the arguments of the Respondent, is also of vital importance.

Conservative women do not believe that the right of abortion is God given, so they do not stand with their sisters against the Government. They have been given no reason too. They do not believe that they are losing a right because it has not been made clear to them that such a right limits government overreach. We shall soon see state governments overreaching and, when they do, the point of abortion as a right against such action (rather than as a divinely ordered right) will become clear to them.