Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
Page Number: 28

20  DOBBS v. JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION 

Opinion of the Court 

points in pregnancy, none endorsed the practice.  Moreover, 
we are aware of no common-law case or authority, and the 
parties  have  not  pointed  to  any,  that  remotely  suggests  a 
positive right to procure an abortion at any stage of preg-
nancy. 

b 

In this country, the historical record is similar.  The “most 
important early American edition of Blackstone’s Commen-
taries,”  District  of  Columbia  v.  Heller,  554  U. S.  570,  594 
(2008), reported Blackstone’s statement that abortion of a 
quick  child  was  at  least  “a  heinous  misdemeanor,”  2  St.
George  Tucker,  Blackstone’s  Commentaries  129–130 
(1803), and that edition also included Blackstone’s discus-
sion  of  the  proto-felony-murder  rule,  5  id.,  at  200–201. 
Manuals for justices of the peace printed in the Colonies in 
the 18th century typically restated the common-law rule on 
abortion,  and  some  manuals  repeated  Hale’s  and  Black-
stone’s statements that anyone who prescribed medication
“unlawfully to destroy the child” would be guilty of murder 
if the woman died.  See, e.g., J. Parker, Conductor Generalis 
220 (1788); 2 R. Burn, Justice of the Peace, and Parish Of-
ficer  221–222  (7th  ed.  1762)  (English  manual  stating  the
same).30 

—————— 

30 For manuals restating one or both rules, see J. Davis, Criminal Law 
96, 102–103, 339 (1838); Conductor Generalis 194–195 (1801) (printed in 
Philadelphia); Conductor Generalis 194–195 (1794) (printed in Albany); 
Conductor Generalis 220 (1788) (printed in New York); Conductor Gen-
eralis 198 (1749) (printed in New York); G. Webb, Office and Authority 
of  a  Justice  of  Peace  232  (1736)  (printed  in  Williamsburg);  Conductor 
Generalis 161 (1722) (printed in Philadelphia); see also J. Conley, Doing 
It by the Book: Justice of the Peace Manuals and English Law in Eight-
eenth Century America, 6 J. Legal Hist. 257, 265, 267 (1985) (noting that 
these manuals were the justices’ “primary source of legal reference” and 
of “practical value for a wider audience than the justices”). 

For  cases  stating  the  proto-felony-murder  rule,  see,  e.g.,  Common-
wealth v. Parker, 50 Mass. 263, 265 (1845); People v. Sessions, 58 Mich.