Controversy of the week
Court’s conservatives show their hand
It may have sounded like a rare legal victory for pro-choicers, but don’t “be bamboozled,” said in When the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 last week that Texas abortion providers can sue state licensing bodies over Texas’ extreme new antiabortion law, it seemed like a respite from weeks of ominous anti-choice signals from the court’s new bloc of five far-right justices. But by letting the Texas law—which authorizes private citizens to sue abortion clinics for $10,000 for each abortion—stay in effect pending further litigation, the ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson shows “just how radical this new conservative majority is.” The ruling “erases all doubt,” said Molly Jong-Fast in Vogue .com. Roe v. Wade will fall this summer, when the court rules on a challenge to a Mississippi abortion law. Ultra-conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas also made it clear in this ruling they are “so partisan and so ideologically conservative” that they will let states flout established precedent “if they agree with the end goal.” Even Chief Justice John Roberts was horrified. His colleagues, he wrote, have made “a solemn mockery” of the Constitution, and given a green light to any state that wants to “nullify this court’s rulings” and “destroy the rights” of its citizens.
That’s “hysterical nonsense,” said Dan McLaughlin in National Review.com. All the court did was uphold the “traditional rule” that federal courts don’t evaluate a law’s constitutionality until an actual plaintiff can show an actual injury. Yes, Texas lawmakers crafted their law to exploit this restraint, calculating that even the threat of expensive lawsuits would make abortion clinics preemptively close their doors. But the remedy liberals wanted—throwing out the Texas law before state courts have had a chance to rule on challenges—would “bulldoze long-standing doctrines limiting the powers of federal courts.”
Let’s see how the court’s conservatives enjoy “a taste of their own medicine,” said Ja’han Jones in MSNBC.com. Immediately following the decision, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced he’ll introduce a bill letting citizens sue gunmakers who sell assault weapons and so-called ghost guns. If Texas can use a bounty mechanism to ignore a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion, then surely California can do the same to bypass the Second Amendment. “It’s a good stunt,” said Elie Mystal in TheNation.com, but it’s “doomed to fail.” The court’s conservatives are ideologues who do not feel bound by logic or consistency. Now that there are four of them to the right of Roberts, they will quickly kill California’s bill despite letting Texas’ stand, because gun rights matter to them. Women’s reproductive rights do not.
As a result, “women in Texas are effectively banned from securing a legal abortion in the state,” said Moira Donegan in TheGuardian.com. The court was so eager to “ban abortion right now” that the justices couldn’t even wait six months for their broader ruling on the Mississippi case. That’s when they get to throw out a half century of precedent and overturn Roe itself, enabling more than 20 states to criminalize abortion again. Ever since former President Trump installed Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett to forge a 6-3 conservative majority, court watchers have wondered, “If the court had to choose between maintaining its own power and legitimacy, and overturning Roe, which would it choose?” After last week’s Texas ruling, “we have our answer.”