As we have learned throughout the course, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was an ardent originalist. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a case involving abortion rights, Justice Scalia dissented and stated two reasons why he thought the Court's controlling decision, which re-affirmed Roe v. Wade, was wrong. First, he made a sort of historical, states' rights-based argument: because he saw a long history of state legislatures regulating and even prohibiting abortions, abortion was something that was firmly within the states' police powers to allow, regulate, or prohibit and should be left up to state legislatures to decide without interference from the federal judiciary. Second, he made a classic "originalism" argument. What, more specifically, was this second reason for his dissent? Group of answer choices the right to privacy was directly included in the text of the Constitution; however, abortion access was not one of the original privacies that the Framers intended to include. he believed that the Supreme Court should have placed the right to access abortion within the Equal Protection Clause, as opposed to the non-enumerated right of privacy. the right to privacy is not explicitly stated in the Constitution. he was personally opposed to abortion