Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
Page Number: 130

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

7 

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring 

this Court establishes that a constitutional precedent may
be  overruled  only  when  (i) the  prior  decision  is  not  just
wrong, but is egregiously wrong, (ii) the prior decision has 
caused  significant  negative  jurisprudential  or  real-world
consequences, and (iii) overruling the prior decision would 
not unduly upset legitimate reliance interests.  See Ramos 
v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, ___−___ (2020) (KAVANAUGH, J., 
concurring in part) (slip op., at 7−8).

Applying those factors, I agree with the Court today that 
Roe should be overruled.  The Court in Roe erroneously as-
signed itself the authority to decide a critically important
moral and policy issue that the Constitution does not grant
this Court the authority to decide.  As Justice Byron White 
succinctly explained, Roe was “an improvident and extrav-
agant  exercise  of  the  power  of  judicial  review”  because
“nothing in the language or history of the Constitution” sup-
ports a constitutional right to abortion.  Bolton, 410 U. S., 
at 221−222 (dissenting opinion).

Of course, the fact that a precedent is wrong, even egre-
giously  wrong,  does  not  alone  mean  that  the  precedent 
should be overruled.  But as the Court today explains, Roe 
has  caused  significant  negative  jurisprudential  and  real-
world consequences.  By taking sides on a difficult and con-
tentious  issue  on  which  the  Constitution  is  neutral,  Roe 
overreached  and  exceeded  this  Court’s  constitutional  au-
thority;  gravely  distorted  the  Nation’s  understanding  of
this Court’s proper constitutional role; and caused signifi-
cant harm to what Roe itself recognized as the State’s “im-
portant and legitimate interest” in protecting fetal life.  410 
U. S., at 162.  All of that explains why tens of millions of 
Americans—and the 26 States that explicitly ask the Court 
to  overrule  Roe—do  not  accept  Roe  even  49  years  later. 
Under the Court’s longstanding stare decisis principles, Roe