that as far as her liberty and whether or not the liberty interests that we're talking about extends to her? >> well, justice thomas, i have to confess that i haven't read the specific case you're referring to. if i understand the question you're posing, it sounds as though the state is seeking to regulate for a child that's been born that was injured while it was inside the womb. and i think that we are not denying that a state has an interest there. we're not denying that a state has an interest here either. roe recognized the states have interests that exist from the outset of pregnancy. with respect to this specific right to abortion, there are also profound liberty interests of the woman on the other side of the scale, and not being forced to continue with the pregnancy, not being forced to ensure childbirth and to have a child in the world. the state's arguments seem to ask this court to look only at its interests and ignore entirely the incredibly weighty interests of the woman on the other side.