Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has reaffirmed his support for the court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, emphasizing that the ruling was a proper constitutional interpretation rather than a politically motivated move. The Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, authored by Alito, ended nearly five decades of federal protection for abortion rights by returning regulatory authority over abortion to individual states.

In a prerecorded interview ahead of the court’s new term, Alito defended the ruling as grounded in originalism, a judicial philosophy that interprets the Constitution based on its text and the understanding at the time it was adopted. He argued that the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, did not establish a constitutional right to abortion, noting that abortion was illegal in most states at that time. According to Alito, it would have been inconceivable for the states that adopted the amendment to have simultaneously invalidated their abortion laws.

Alito, widely regarded as one of the court’s most conservative justices alongside Clarence Thomas, described himself as a “working judicial originalist” who approaches the Constitution with a practical lens, while expressing caution against overly academic interpretations of originalism. He has recently been promoting his book, *So Ordered: An Originalist’s View of the Constitution, the Court, and Our Country*, which explores his judicial philosophy and vision for the judiciary.

The Dobbs ruling dismantled the legal foundation established by Roe v. Wade, which had been based on an inferred right to privacy under the 14th Amendment. Alito asserted that the Constitution itself contains no reference to abortion or privacy rights, and argued that such significant policy decisions should be made through the political process by Congress and state legislatures.

Alito also voiced concern over what he described as growing efforts to politicize and intimidate the Supreme Court and its justices. He warned that attempts to influence judicial decisions by public pressure or threats undermine the independence of the judiciary. Since the Dobbs decision, Alito and his colleagues have faced increased scrutiny and threats, reflecting the intense national debate surrounding the court’s role in contentious social issues.