Masking Radicalism With Restraint: The Rhetorical Redefinition of Conservative Jurisprudence in <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization</i>

Originalists urge courts to exercise judicial restraint over activism when deciding cases. Despite judicial restraint’s association with conservative philosophy, the Supreme Court majority rejected long-established precedent in the Dobbs decision, overturning Roe v. Wade . In this essay, I argue that the Court rationalized its rejection of stare decisis using a rhetoric of originalist mythic rationalization , a technique allowing conservative justices to redefine the law by rationalizing their radical action as judicial modesty.