be involved if roe were to be overturned? mister chairman, i think that the legitimacy of the court would be undermined in any case, if the court made a decision based on its perception of public opinion. it should make its decisions based on the constitution, and the law, it should not sway in a wind of public opinion at anytime. julia lithwick, what did we or should we have learned from that answer in his confirmation hearing? yeah, that was the tell, lawrence. he was very very transparent that, casey, which is a protracted meditation on stare decisis, and the need of the court to not reverse course willy-nilly, because people have a reliance interest, they order their lives around constitutional protections that are afforded them. what you just heard justice alito say it was pretty much where he put in his draft opinion which is that, not my problem. and it s really interesting
the supreme court, my court, all of the federal courts should be insulated from public opinion. they should do with the law requires in all instances. that s why the members of the judiciary are not elected. we have a basically democratic form of government, but the judiciary is not elected in, and that s the reason, so that they don t do anything under fire. anything the law requires. do you think there is as fundamental a concern as legitimacy of the court would be involved if roe were to be overturned? mister chairman, i think that the legitimacy of the court would be undermined in any case, if the court made a decision based on its perception of public opinion. it should make its decisions based on the constitution, and the law, it should not sway in a wind of public opinion at anytime. julia lithwick, what did we or should we have learned from that answer in his confirmation
know i m saying? there s a way in which the fast retrograde politics of the new wright puts us on a very different timeline, then the way we think of ourselves as a mature democracy. this is a decision, the repercussions of how this draft came to light we ve only started to understand the basic implications of that, and kind of radicalism that you re describing. but what this means for women in the very short term will not be theoretical this will be a very practical, thing and this will change the lives of women of every station but particularly women without resources, marginalized women, and women who are pouring can t work around the law in a case like this. this will fundamentally change women s lives, this, year this generation and, permanently because the decisions are forced by the government on whether or not a woman gives
separately acknowledged that in planned parenthood v. casey, the supreme court s controlling opinion talked about the reliance interests on roe v. wade, which in treated in that case a super president. is roe a super president? how would you define super president. i m out of thought sunday i d be sitting in the chair, but i m not, i m up here, so i m asking you. people you super president differently. the way it is used in the scholarship, and the way that i was using it in the article that you re reading from was to define cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling. i don t answering a lot of questions about row, which indicates the role doesn t fall in that category. and scholars across the spectrum say that it doesn t mean that roe should be overruled. but, descriptively, it doesn t mean that it is not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn t golfers overruling.
pointed by presidents who didn t win the popular vote, and one case by president who had already been impeached. it doesn t matter, because once you ve got power, you can use it to wreck everything, because stare decisis doesn t exist, and whatever we d say has to go, goes and we have the power to do, it and how you gonna respond? we it s a challenge on the legitimacy and credibility claims of the court, that implies that battle is over. that they re no longer trying to appeal to people, respecting them for their work. and let s consider what this republican controlled court does not respect, they do not respect the in effect republican controlled court the wrote roe v. wade, it was a 72 decision 49 years ago, and five of the deciding justices in favor of roe v. wade, where republican appointed supreme court justices.