From the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, this is Free Expression with Jerry Baker.

Hello and welcome to Free Expression with me, Jerry Baker, from the Wall Street Journal editorial page.

We're delighted you listening to this podcast. If you enjoy it, please be sure to subscribe at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and elsewhere,

and be kind enough also pleased to leave us a favourable

review. Now at the journal's editorial page, we believe strongly in free expression. And so on this

podcast, we explore in depth and candor issues of topical interests. We speak to people who are

leading figures in their field, practitioners, experts, commentators, try to give us a better

understanding of the big issues of the times. My guest this week I'm pleased to say is Carter Sneed, Professor of Law and Political Science and Director of the DeNicola Centre for Ethics and Culture at the University of Notre Dame. Professor Sneed is a leading authority in the world on bioethics. He's the author of what it means to be human, the case for the body in public bioethics, which was named by

none other than the Wall Street Journal as one of the 10 best books of 2020. He's also written

at great length on issues relating to bioethics on abortion, human embryo research, assisted

reproduction, and end-of-life issues. In addition to his scholarship and teaching, the professor

has provided advice on legal and public policy issues to officials in all branches of the US government. And most recently, he filed an amicus brief, friend of the court brief, in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health case that was decided by the Supreme Court last week, as we now all know. And needless to say, Professor Sneed's side won the argument. Professor Sneed, thank you very much indeed

for joining me. Thanks for inviting me. It's a pleasure to be here. Let's start, if we may, with the Dobbs case, and we can talk a bit about the brief that you filed. But I want to start, if I may, we've seen, I think it's fair to say, perhaps not unexpectedly, a pretty alarmed reaction from many, many people in the United States, in the media and academia and politics and

elsewhere, suggesting that the Dobbs ruling, the opinion 5-4 ruling and the opinion authored by Justice Alito, as a rolling back of women's rights is going to lead to terrible suffering for women as an extraordinary infringement by federal judiciary, by the rights of women

to make decisions over their own bodies. And we look like we're into the early stages of

an all-out culture war that might make the culture war that we've seen in the last 10 years or so

look like a minor skirmish. As those, again, who argued very persuasively and passionately

on the side that actually

in the end was successful, what would you say to those who do have legitimate concerns here

that this represents a kind of cultural revolution that could have extraordinary

repercussions for women and society? How do you respond to those concerns? First of all,

I would try to respond with empathy.

...