By Michael
Brendan Dougherty
Friday, May 06,
2022
We should hesitate to treat the
leaked Supreme Court opinion, authored by Justice Thomas Alito, as likely to
resemble the final opinion of the Court. It is over three months old. The
opinion’s length, an exhaustive 98 pages, its direct language: “We hold that Roe and Casey must
be overruled,” and its long recounting of the historic opinions of previous
courts on the matter of abortion — which amount to a kind of shadow
opinion on abortion’s essential barbarity — suggest to me that Alito was tasked
with writing an “everything and the kitchen sink” draft that would be edited
and reduced by colleagues who are not as resolute in these convictions as
Alito.
The fact of the leaked draft is a real institutional danger to the functioning of the Supreme Court itself, which is
regrettable. But, even if this opinion is substantially cut down, diminished,
or disfigured by his colleagues, I’m glad that we have a record of its
existence and can read it for generations hence.
What Alito has penned here is the crowning
achievement of the conservative legal movement. It is the statement that
hundreds of millions of people, many now dead, have coordinated their political
efforts to make possible. First, it makes the argument that Roe itself
was wrongly decided, and it relishes quoting liberal and progressive scholars
who admit the makey-up nature of the holding in Roe, one that had
to be substantially demolished and rebuilt again on the makey-up Casey sequel.
Alito’s opinion, with heavy amounts of citation, undermines entirely the
historical arguments made by the pro-Roe lawyers in oral arguments,
which try to fit abortion into the 14th Amendment’s understanding of due
process. “Until the latter part of the 20th century, there was no support in
American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Zero. None.”
Alito’s opinion is the vindication of the
predictions made by Justice Antonin Scalia’s fiery dissent in the Casey case in
1992, that the Court had fooled itself with its opinion of its own magisterial
authority and ability to settle controversies definitively. It is the
definitive argument that by arrogating to itself the decision to interrupt the
process of legislation in the states, the Supreme Court in 1973 not only overstepped
its authority, but set the American state and politics on a course of
dysfunction, one that could not be settled by reaffirmation 19 years later
in Casey.
Arguably, the decision even has some
impishness in it. Alito writes “Roe was egregiously wrong from the
start,” a line that seems to mockingly parody progressive legal scholar
Mark Tushnet’s 2016 essay calling for left-wing justices to launch a far more activist “jurisprudence of
‘wrong the day it was decided.’” Alito also mocks the language of Justice
Anthony Kennedy — the infamous “sweet mystery of life” passage, which was a
relativistic shrug in the face of a legal, moral, and political enormity.
The drafted opinion demolishes the theory
that wrong decisions become more respectable and hallowed merely by the passage
of time, not only by listing egregious Supreme Court decisions that nearly
everyone now agrees had to be overturned, but by showing how much
disrespect Casey paid to Roe.
Along the way, the opinion cites how far
removed the American jurisprudence and practice on abortion is from that of the
rest of the world. America is a bizarrely anarchic outlier by these standards.
And further along, Alito drops in the factual details about fetal development
and the procedures of abortion that inspired and shaped the law at issue in
Mississippi.
These facts, recited in such an opinion,
do not of themselves move America’s abortion settlement to the pro-life side.
But they are more than an argument that abortion can be
regulated or in many cases criminalized by states, as it has been in the past. No,
taken together, and stated so plainly, the paragraphs in this opinion are a
rhetorical case that states ought to do so. “The inescapable conclusion is that
a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and
traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on
pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law
until 1973.”
That is to say, Alito’s drafted opinion
manages to do what so few essays and treatises taking up this subject can do:
be truthful and shrewd. The publication of this opinion was a sin. But O
felix culpa, this opinion should be anthologized with all the greatest
writing on the topic of abortion in the United States. It belongs alongside
Richard Selzer’s haunting essays, Joe Sobran’s collection Single Issues.
Alito’s opinion joins a cloud of witnesses, convicting our age.
No comments:
Post a Comment