Angela LaRosa | Reporter

Josh Boston, professor in the Political Science Department, was invited to speak at Understanding Dobbs, hosted by the Center of Women and Gender Equity. 

Boston has a doctorate and studies the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts, but is not an attorney. However, knowledgeable enough, he provides what he calls a — great service to campus. 

On Friday, Sept. 16, he lectured about precedents in courts — specifically in the Supreme Court cases Roe v. Wade (1973), Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022).

“Judicial precedent matters,” Boston said. “They have an impact on courts, as we see with Dobbs.” While judges plot the path for law, Boston said precedents fill in the gray areas.  

The landmark decision which overturned 50 years of women’s reproductive rights as established in Roe v. Wade challenged the norm of stare decisis — which translates from Latin to “let the decision stand” or “to stand by things decided.”

While precedents compel judges to interpret precedents to justify new policies established in current opinions, decisions are in the eye of the beholder, Boston said. 

Once judged by the Supreme Court as an undue burden standard and backed by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled that since abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution, the decision in the Dobbs case returned regulations on abortions to the states. 

“We’re at square one. We don’t know what’s allowable,” Boston said.

Boston described the Dobbs ruling as a way to “strike down laws but also strike down existing precedents.” While judges in lower courts are bound by a Code of Conduct, “the Supreme Court Justices aren’t bound by the Code of Conduct.”

Understanding Dobbs with Boston and the Center for Women and Gender Equity continues on Tuesday, Sept. 27 and Tuesday, October 18. Both lectures will be held in Hayes 203 from noon to 1 p.m.