The oral argument is complete in the Mississippi abortion case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. In our previous two episodes, Professor Amar prepared our audience with a remarkable menu of constitutional theory, a recap of the relevant cases and the orientation of the justices.  We now look at the actual argument and find where it cohered with Akhil’s notions.  We critique the arguments, the advocates, and the arbiters, and discuss arguments that might have been made.  Was precedent ("Stare Decisis") the theme, and did it have to be?  The voices of the justices, inserted in our podcast, put you right there, with Professor Amar as your guide.