To unpack today Supreme Court opinion, including its conservative
majority and the liberal descent, We turned out to Marcia Coyle of
the National Law Journal. Welcome Back to the program. Marsha, this
is a big one. Put this in context, though, in the
In the pantheon of major Supreme Court decisions. Where does this
one fit? This is huge. It's been I can't even remember when the Supreme
Court last
Revoked a right that, uh, American citizen held and so this one
was nearly 50 years old, had also been reaffirmed multiple times
and rolling the clock back. Essentially, is that right? Absolutely.
It does, Uh, it's going to be there will be a patchwork of laws around
the nation.
Either having abortion, legal or illegal. Will we see some of the
deaths and injuries that occurred pre Roe when desperate women may
have gone to back alley type abortions?
I don't know. It will depend on how some of these abortion laws are
structured. We did have an inkling this was coming. The leaked draft
opinion written by Justice Alito that came out
In May, and we see some of that same language in this opinion. I
want to quote from part of today's decision and I'm quoting we hold
it. Roe and Casey must be overruled.
The Constitution makes no reference to abortion. And no such right
is implicitly protected by any constitutional provisions, including
the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly relied.
That provision has been held a guarantee some rights that are not
mentioned in the Constitution. But any such right must be quote deeply
rooted in this nation's history and tradition.
And the right to abortion does not fall within this category. So
explain what the Justice Justice Alito was getting out there. Judy,
the conservative majority on this court.
Approaches the constitution by and constitutional rights by looking
at the text of the constitution, tradition and history. There are
many respected American historians who disagree and also challenged
The ability of the courts and judges in general to do the kind of
historical research that is required to reach these kinds of conclusions.
But be that as it may the court did. The majority did do that analysis
and found that as I said abortion did not fall in that category.
So Marcia As we see the Chief Justice John Roberts, he does sign
onto the majority opinion. But he also writes a separate concurring.
Opinion, saying the court aired in his words by completely overruling
Roe and Casey and I'm just quoting from what he wrote, he said, if
it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case
Then it is necessary not to decide more.
Surely we should adhere closely to principles of judicial restraint
here, where the broader path the court chooses entails repudiating
a constitutional right. We have not only previously recognized but
also expressly reaffirmed, applying the doctrine of story decisis.
So what is do you see Justice chief the chief justice, saying he
wanted to, uh, only deal with the line that Roland KC drew about
abortion bans that you could not be an abortion before viability.
That's at 22 to 24 weeks. He felt that that was not
Uh, clearly justified line. He was concerned about the court's legitimacy
and making this ruling at this time, and he agreed with that part
of the Alito majority opinion that did get rid of the viability line.
But he would not, as you said, go so far as to overrule the entire
row in Casey decisions.
And Marcia, as we know there was a strongly worded dissent by the
three liberal justices. Here is what part of what they wrote. In
today's opinion as a matter of constitutional substance. The majority's
opinion
Has all the flaws. It's method would suggest, because laws in 18
68 deprived women of any control over their bodies. The majority
approves states doing so today.
Today's decision strips women of agency over what Even the majority
agrees is a contested and contestable moral issue. It forces her
to carry out the states will whatever the circumstances and whatever
the harm it will wreak on her and her family in the 14th amendments
terms, it takes away her liberty.
Duty. The descent had a lot of problems. Obviously, with the majority
opinion first, the history the point Justice Breyer, Kagan and Sotomayor
made very clearly was that the history that the majority relied upon
The laws at the time that they looked at were all made by men. Women
at the time did not have rights that basically any rights at all.
So that was one flaw. The other flaw. Very important flaw they felt
was that the majority failed to
To stand by old precedents, and that's known as starry, decisive.
The descent felt the majority did not properly apply the factors
that the court has generally applied when determining whether to
overrule an earlier precedent factors like reliance and workability.
Uh, And so I think those were the two main takeaways. One other thing
I would add about the majority opinion, Judy that I think is kind
of important. Is that going forward? How will courts judge abortion
regulations and restrictions And the majority opinion says that all
estate has to do is justify that regulation on via rational, reasonable
basis, and that is considered
The easiest form of constitutional scrutiny. So what does that mean
for the state courts?
It means it. State and federal courts will be probably upholding
many more abortion regulations and restrictions than they have done
in the past. Marcia Coyle beginning to digest this
Most historic and significant decision handed down today by the Supreme
Court, Marsha Thank you.