Although there isn’t a ton going on right now in the Supreme Court in terms of controversy, the American people and the news cycle always look to create it. This week, one thing went on that, although not incredibly important in the grand scheme of things, have the potential to shake up the future of the Court for good.
You may remember the highly contentious spectacle that was the Brett Kavanaugh nomination process from earlier this year. If you don’t, see my two-part post on it where I break it down step by step into digestible bits. Essentially, the country was split down the middle via the Senate chamber when a prospective Justice, who sits for life, was alleged of a sexual assault that occurred earlier in his life. You may also remember that the vote that eventually confirmed him possessed the slimmest of margins.
Perhaps the deciding vote on the confirmation came from Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins. Initially, Senator Collins was opposed to the idea of a Kavanaugh appointment due to he unique stance as a pro-choice Republican. If you recall, much of the early opposition to Kavanaugh’s appointment arose from his supposed lack of support for Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood. Despite his frequent denial during the vetting process that he would not touch Roe because it is “precedent on precedent,” Kavanaugh may have given us some reason to believe otherwise.
Kavanaugh joined three other conservative justices in dissenting to a Supreme Court order that blocked an anti-abortion Louisiana law from going into effect; the law required doctors performing abortions to have the authority to admit patients to nearby hospitals. Left-wing rights groups contend that the law would have dramatically reduced eligible doctors, leaving the state just one physician to perform abortions. The law is virtually identical to a Texas anti-abortion law that the Supreme Court voted against in 2016 with the help of former Justice Anthony Kennedy (who was often the swing vote), who was succeeded by Kavanaugh last year.
Although this may be alarming, I feel that such a case is not indicative of the direction that Kavanaugh may swing despite what countless stories in the mainstream media may argue. Having read the decision, I think that the issue was decided more on judicial philosophy than political preference, as the Conservative votes were largely based on the idea of originalism that Scalia so famously pioneered.
TLDR: The media seems to think that Kavanaugh’s vote spells the end of Roe, but I don’t agree.
I agree with you that it’s too early to claim with confidence that anything drastic will happen. Kavanaugh is certainly more anti-abortion than Kennedy was, but I think it depends on whether the pressure put on him by Trump and/or the Republican party can outweigh the legal ramifications that would come with overturning Roe v Wade, which Kavanaugh clearly understands.
Quite frankly, I don’t know enough about this topic to offer my own informed opinion. Based on what I do know, however, it should not be a foregone conclusion that past decisions like Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood will be overturned. If, as you say, these decisions are being made on judicial and not political grounds, then I agree that it would be unlikely that such a large decision be overturned.
I try and stay away from SCOTUS just due to the recent toxicity of it, but I find your perspective interesting. That even though they do hold right leaning positions on issues, they do decide on cases as judges (for the most part). Although I believe that judicial bias will always occur, I do hope and believe that do utilize Scalias philosophy no matter how wrong it is, it’s better than the alternatives.
You made a good point that it’s much to early to decide. I appreciated the recap of the controversy behind the latest justice and why that made this decision such a big deal. It was also interesting to see that this was a philosophical vote more so than a political bias.