[0] Unfortunately, only in theory considering how often attacks against that protection are made by US policymakers.
Fundamentally if we're ok with weakening some amendments through interpretation short of constitutional convention we should resign ourselves to the idea that we are weakening all of them.
> (1) First, the Court reviews the standard that the Court’s cases have used to determine whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s reference to “liberty” protects a particular right.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
Edit: I guess it's actually both.
> Roe held that the abortion right is part of a right to privacy that springs from the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
Something like the European Convention on Human Rights, ratified into local law by each country. That would be much harder politically to overturn by the next parliament.
Can't see it happening though.
And if you are not taught law, how can anyone claim to live in a democracy to debate the laws?
Everybody is born into a legal dictatorship if you weren't taught law and with todays communication technology, there is no excuse for it. Its just setting people up to be victims of crime especially kids, its a criminal way to make people dependent on employees of the state who claim to be picking up the pieces.
Secondly employees of the state are treated as superior to members of the public by the courts, which makes me think the legal system isn't fit for purpose here in the UK.