Times-Herald (Vallejo)

Unusual public pressure on Supreme Court

- By Lisa Mascaro

WASHINGTON >> The traditiona­lly insular Supreme Court is about to face the full force of public pressure and abortion politics as justices make a final decision on whether to throw out the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling.

The justices are entering a politicall­y explosive new era, drafting what may well be the most consequent­ial opinion on women's health and privacy in 50 years, while a watchful public primed by the nation's culture wars looks over their shoulders and tries furiously to influence the outcome.

Justice Samuel Alito appeared to be bracing for the onslaught, stiffening the spines of his conservati­ve court colleagues in his leaked draft opinion for the court's majority that would overturn the 1973 ruling and its constituti­onal right to abortion.

“We cannot allow our decisions to be affected by any extraneous influences such as concern about the public's reaction to our work,” Alito wrote in the February draft document circulated to fellow justices as they prepare a final decision, expected by June.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi often says, quoting Abraham Lincoln, public sentiment is everything. But justices, unlike lawmakers, don't have to run for reelection.

At one point this week, more than 1,000 people flooded to the steps of the Supreme Court. In Los Angeles, police put the city on tactical alert after a confrontat­ion between abortion rights supporters and police downtown. Fresh polling showed most Americans support preserving some access

to abortion services.

“Let us fight with everything we've got,” Vice President Kamala Harris said in a speech at the EMILY's List political action committee's national conference.

While President Joe Biden and fellow proponents of abortion access are fired up to defend Roe v. Wade, the pushing is far from one-sided. Republican­s who have labored toward this moment for decades with efforts to fill the court with conservati­ve justices — gaining three during the four years of the Trump administra­tion — are determined to finally accomplish their goal.

Urging the justices to stick to their process, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell promised that senators would “have their backs, no matter what.”

In a televised speech from the Capitol just across the street from the court, McConnell, a chief architect of a campaign to confirm conservati­ve judges, encouraged the justices to “tune out the bad faith noise and feel completely free to do their jobs.”

The leaked draft gave Americans a rare, up-close sneak preview of the typically private, hidden deliberati­ons of the high court, and the disclosure is propelling a public outpouring of opinion and protest reflective of the nation's long debate over abortion policy — all in the run-up to the fall's contested congressio­nal elections.

It's unclear if the justices will be swayed by the intense public scrutiny. But the disclosure has launched the most dramatic pulling back of the curtain on the high court's work in modern memory. Not since the 1970s have the Supreme Court's private deliberati­ons become so public — in fact, the final Roe v. Wade decision leaked hours before it was announced.

Political pressure campaigns are being launched and millions of dollars unleashed on all sides, to save or end abortion access in the U.S., all while the justices privately draft their final opinion.

While the justices themselves have lifetime appointmen­ts and are shielded from the need for campaign contributi­ons that can influence views, elected officials and candidates running for the House, Senate and offices throughout the states will be confronted with untold efforts to force them to take sides.

“Every single American is going to see where every single senator stands on protecting a woman's right to choose,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer promised. “Americans will be watching.”

To be sure, for Democrats and others trying to preserve abortion access, public opinion is about the only tool on their side, with Congress very unlikely to salvage the Roe v. Wade ruling on its own.

The House, led by Democrats, has already approved legislatio­n that would protect abortion access by putting the Roe ruling into law. But the narrowly split Democratic Senate will not have the votes to follow suit without support from Republican­s.

Just two Republican senators, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, publicly support abortion access. And while they have introduced their own bill to keep abortion legal, it is not at all clear they would buck their own party leadership to help pass a Democratic measure.

Other Republican­s, following McConnell's lead, have been quick to focus on the leaking of the high court's private draft, rather than the prospect that millions of American women could lose access to abortion services if Roe v. Wade is struck down. Speculatio­n is swirling over the rare leak and whether it was meant to build pressure for the outcome that Alito was proposing or against it.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, a former law clerk to Alito, described the security around the court's work, complete with “burn bags” to collect and doubleshre­d the day's discarded documents. He decried the breach even as he welcomed the direction the court was taking under the draft opinion.

“While I'm convinced this leak may have been an attempt to intimidate the justices in the majority, perhaps an effort to try to get them to change their positions, I'm also confident this attempt will not succeed and it must not succeed,” Lee said on the Senate floor.

Chief Justice John Roberts has ordered an investigat­ion into the leak, but it is unclear how long that will take.

 ?? ALEX BRANDON — THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE ?? Demonstrat­ors protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.
ALEX BRANDON — THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE Demonstrat­ors protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States