The Alito opinion differs from the draft in that much of it is designed to address the dissent, which is unsurprising. The tone of it–angry, slashing, defiant culture warrior–has not changed, and the structure of the argument is very similar. On the most important point–the impact of the decision on Griswold and Obergefell–the final version still unequivocally distinguishes abortion from the other cases, even if the logic behind the decision doesn’t.
Thomas, I as predicted, spiked the football. He wants to overturn Griswold and Obergefell, as well. He doesn’t appear to have any support for that, and his concurring opinion is full of citations to opinions written by . . . himself.
Kavanaugh’s concurrence is much more moderate in tone, probably for political reasons. It didn’t work; Susan Collins has already called him a liar this morning. The most interesting thing about his opinion is his clear statement that any future attempt to criminalize crossing state lines for the purpose of getting an abortion will run afoul of the First Amendment right to travel. That case will undoubtedly be coming to the Court in the next few years.
The Roberts concurrence focuses on judicial restraint. Everyone, including me, expected that.
I will have more posts on the decision from a variety of angles over the next few days.