How did Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization change the Supreme Court's interpretation of due process in Roe v. Wade?

In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court interpreted the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as encompassing a right to privacy that included the right to obtain an abortion. This interpretation relied on the doctrine of substantive due process, which holds that certain fundamental rights are protected from government interference even if they are not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution.12

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), the Supreme Court rejected this interpretation, explicitly overturning Roe and its successor, Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992). The Court held that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion, concluding that such a right is not deeply rooted in the nation's history or tradition. By doing so, the Dobbs decision effectively ended the Court's recognition of abortion as a protected liberty interest under the due process clause. While some justices, such as Clarence Thomas, have further argued that the due process clause should not be interpreted to protect any substantive rights at all, the majority opinion focused on the finding that abortion specifically lacks the necessary constitutional support.3214