Having argued landmark privacy cases before the Florida Supreme Court, I’m saddened to see the court rule that a woman’s ability to have an abortion is no longer protected under the Florida Constitution. As a lover of the rule of law, the sadness is in watching the court devolve into a third political branch of government, where decisions appear to be based upon the personal beliefs and political agendas of the justices and the governor who appoints them.

Respect for the law depends upon the public perceiving that judicial determinations are based upon underlying legal principles rather than a court’s current personnel.

Our governor appointed supreme court justices with reported anti-abortion credentials, leading pundits to predict that the court would deliver on that agenda. Unfortunately, the Florida Supreme Court did little to dispel that notion. Not only is its opinion legally unpersuasive, but worse, justices use their opinions to trumpet their pro-life/anti-abortion beliefs.

In 1980, Florida voters adopted a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into their private lives. For decades our Florida courts have ruled that this “right to privacy” pertains to decisions regarding abortion. But now, the majority delves into history and finds that Floridians were clueless in 1980 that the amendment pertained to abortion.

Beyond its foray into history, the majority undermines its opinion with contorted logic. To this court, abortion is not a matter associated with the right to privacy because an abortion, as a “medical intervention,” requires “both the presence and intrusion of others.” According to the court’s logic, the presence of third parties renders a decision to end a pregnancy no longer a “private” matter. Perhaps a woman can retain her right of privacy by choosing to perform her own abortion?

This fanciful logic is dangerous, as it could be applied to other privacy rights.