Reader Responses to The Good Fight

I was disappointed to read BAM’s sympathetic treatment of the practice of abortion [“The Good Fight,” Cecile Richards Farewell, Obituaries, Jun.-Aug. ’25]. This view is evident in language like “the U.S. Supreme Court revoked the 50-year-old right to an abortion,” implying that the Court was denying a well-established “right” when it overturned Roe v. Wade. Roe was a tragic break with the long history of legal prohibitions of abortion. Consider the majority opinion for Dobbs: “Until the latter part of the 20th century, there was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. No state constitutional provision had recognized such a right.” Also, BAM’s sympathetic view toward abortion, and toward Planned Parenthood in particular, is inconsistent with the University’s stated goal of pursuing racial equality. Black children are aborted in America at a disproportionately high rate. Ending abortion would save the lives of many Black children. Moreover, Margaret Sanger (the ignominious founder of Planned Parenthood) explicitly pursued a racist eugenics project. I ask, are Sanger’s views consistent with the ideals of Brown University? If not, then why show support for the organization that she founded? The Supreme Court was right to overturn Roe v. Wade, and BAM would do well to acknowledge this.