Abbreviated Pundit Roundup: Firestorm over Roe
This post was originally published on this site
So who knew an issue popping up this week would knock Ukraine out of being story #1? If you didn’t, be a bit humble as you confidently explain What It All Means.
A Supreme Court in Disarray After an Extraordinary Breach
The leak of a draft majority opinion overruling Roe v. Wade raises questions about motives, methods and whether defections are still possible.
Sources have motives, and the leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade raises a question as old as the Roman Empire. Cui bono? Who benefits?
Not the Supreme Court as an institution. Its reputation was in decline even before the extraordinary breach of its norms of confidentiality, with much of the nation persuaded that it is little different from the political branches of the government. The internal disarray the leak suggests, wholly at odds with the decorum prized by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., was a blow to the legitimacy of the court.
Jennifer Rubin/WaPo:
The Supreme Court’s religion-driven mission sets off a firestorm
The leak itself, while not entirely unprecedented, is further evidence that the court has ceased to act like a court and now conducts itself like a partisan operation seeking to manipulate public opinion.
As would be entirely expected, pro-choice advocates reacted with fury over the news, with an unusually pointed statement from the White House on a pending case: “If the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.”..
With polls showing as much as 70 percent of Americans favoring the preservation of Roe v. Wade, unelected justices — in some cases appointed by presidents who lacked a popular-vote majority and confirmed by senators who did not represent a majority of the country — would bring to head a battle between a fading racial, religious and political minority and an increasingly diverse, secular country.
After leak of draft abortion decision, advocates react with emotion
‘Life in this country will be noticeably different’
“What can you say?” said Alan Braid, an abortion provider in Texas and Oklahoma who chose his profession after caring for several women who died from botched abortions before Roe.
“Life in this country will be noticeably different. There will be, every day, some story on some local news channel about somebody dying. I guarantee it.”
Democrats hope draft abortion opinion will jolt midterm elections
The Supreme Court’s potential move to overturn Roe v. Wade sparked frustration and vows to protect abortion rights from governors, senators and House members.
Hours after POLITICO’s reporting on the high court’s draft opinion, Democrats privately predicted that the potential decision by its five-conservative majority to repeal the landmark abortion-rights ruling would energize their base and drive up turnout in November. The party’s governors, senators and House members took to social media and the airwaves with reactions that ranged from pleas to codify Roe to emotional personal stories.
Jeremy Stahl/Slate:
Who Leaked Samuel Alito’s Draft Opinion Striking Down Roe v. Wade—and Why?
If the five justices maintain their votes to strike down Roe once the opinion is announced, likely in June, the immediate consequence is that abortion would become illegal in about half of all U.S. states. This would obviously be an earthquake in American social and political life, and it is the most consequential piece of news from Monday’s leak.
There is, however, another monumental story: that the opinion was leaked to begin with, and from one of the most secretive bodies in the country. A draft Supreme Court opinion has never been leaked in full in history, and there hasn’t been an advanced leak of an outcome since 1986. Only the justices themselves and their small clique of law clerks would likely have access to such a draft. The closest similar example in the past 32 years came when somebody leaked, in 2012, that Chief Justice John Roberts had initially voted to strike down all of Obamacare, before changing his mind and voting to uphold the individual mandate. (Notably, as law professor Jonathan Peters wrote on Twitter, details of the original 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, including the vote itself, were reported in advance by Time magazine.)
Scoop: Senate Republicans share abortion talking points
Why it matters: The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) recognizes the decision will have major implications in this fall’s midterms and the 2024 presidential race. The memo is its attempt to have its members speak to voters with a unified voice.
- “Be the compassionate, consensus-builder on abortion policy. … While people have many different views on abortion policy, Americans are compassionate people who want to welcome every new baby into the world,” it says.
- “Expose the Democrats for the extreme views they hold,” the document says, arguing, “Joe Biden and the Democrats have extreme and radical views on abortion that are outside of the mainstream of most Americans.”
- “Forcefully refute Democrat lies regarding GOP positions on abortion and women’s health care,” it adds, saying Republicans do not want to take away contraception, mammograms and female health care or throw doctors and women in jail.
Between the lines: The document includes sample language for anti-abortion ads.
And on Ukraine: