I read James Allan’s comments on my column in the Australian about the US Supreme Court’s abortion decisions with considerable astonishment – and a fair measure of disappointment. The Spectator’s readers are owed a clarification.

I never suggested that the court should not overturn its previous decisions. Rather, I simply affirmed the position the court has repeatedly stated: that stability in the legal order has a high value; and that as a result, the court should only reverse its prior holdings when not to do so would perpetuate a manifest and harmful error.