The Sabarimala review, mapped: A weekly round-up on Constitution First

On Monday, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court convened for the second day of hearings in the review of the landmark 2018 Sabarimala verdict, which struck down the temple’s prohibition on women between the ages of 10 and 50.

In February 2020, the Court had framed seven issues for consideration. On the second day of hearings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that ’constitutional morality’, invoked in landmark rulings decriminalising adultery and homosexuality, has no textual basis in the Constitution and cannot override societal morality. He contended that courts are not empowered to reform religious practices, and that the task of social welfare and reform belongs to the legislature under Article 25(2)(b).

Our latest piece, by Ajitesh Singh and Tanishka Shah, maps the written submissions from both sides across six of those seven framed issues.

Read what both sides have argued in their written submissions here.