SeductiveSunday

Idaho, Texas, Oklahoma

In another comment you've stated that "the most “settled” would be the right to travel" but states have already passed laws restricting the travel of women. Is it not “settled” in this case because the constitution doesn't apply to women?

Seems clear the U.S. constitution still today does not adequately protect citizens from sex discrimination leaving U.S. women in limbo with a legal system that was never meant to protect them. After all aren't women still basically under coverture laws in the US unless the ERA passes?

It was your mention of Saenz v. Roe which enabled me to locate the paper below with more detail on the subject. Thanks!

The Post-Dobbs Legality of Out-of-State Abortion Travel Bans

So are you saying that Saenz v. Roe could be used in courts to argue that women have the right to freedom of travel? Or, would it still be necessary for the ERA to get passed before ensuring women can gain that right?