WASHINGTON, D.C. A Supreme Court draft opinion from “pro-appendix” Justice Samuel Alito was leaked ahead of the court’s upcoming decision on a landmark appendectomy rights case.
In it, Justice Alito declares that “the Constitution makes no reference to appendectomy, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.”
Alito’s draft specifically states that “appendectomy is not deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions. None of the Founding Fathers had appendectomies. The first appendectomy was not performed until the 1880s.” Alito reportedly avoided questions from his staff about why he thought pre-1880s America was a morally superior time period.
The draft-penning Justice assured the nation that his decision was “spurred by a sincere belief that an appendectomy kills part of a human being.” However, he asserted that this “sincere belief” is not rooted in any particular religion, of course.
Rather, Alito said it was objective and impartial legal reasoning that led him to conclude that the appendix is a living part of the body created in the image of God. If God ordains that the appendix shall burst and take away the life of, say, a woman, such is God’s plan and that settles it.
But patients with appendicitis are not without political power. Alito said that turning the issue back to states will let the people decide the issue in free and fair gerrymandered elections funded by dark money that the Supreme Court has declared constitutionally protected speech.
Appendix-rights groups welcomed Alito’s drafted opinion. In their view, the appendix is innocent and free of any sinful history, no matter how it was conceived. Besides, the appendix is a cute little bean that never needs diapers, formula, daycare, or public schooling—or any government-funded programs, for that matter. It has a right to life like any other organ, these groups claim.
In a footnote, Alito’s draft specifies that “wealthy men will still be able to access appendectomies under specific and severe conditions, such as wanting one, having the procedure recommended by a medical doctor, or needing to pay for their mistress to get one.”
All three Justices recently appointed by Mitch McConnell (the senator representing the Federalist Society) signed the opinion. This move comes as no surprise to political analysts. During their confirmation hearings, all three Justices affirmed that certain rights were stare decisis, which is Latin for “we can rip up any laws we don’t agree with.”