In garza v hargen. Thats a young woman in texas that was seeking an abortion. In that dissent, you argued that even though the young woman had complied with the texas parental notification law and secured an approval from a judge, she should have nonetheless be barred. In making your argument, you ignored and i believe mischaracterized a Supreme Court precedent. You reasoned that jane doe should not be unable to exercise her right to choose because she did not have family and friends to make her decision. The argue rewrites streupreme court precedent. And, if adopted, we believe would require courts to determine whether a young woman had a spisufficient support netk in making cases, even in cases shes been to court this reason, we believe, i believe, demonstrates that you are willing to disregard precedent. And if thats the case, because just saying something settled law it really isnt correct law. The impact of overturning roe is much broader than a womans right to choose. Its about p