Trump judges accused of going back on their word on Rowe — but did they?

cHive Judge John Roberts condemn Leaked draft Supreme Court opinion dismissing Roe v. Wade, calling it “treason.” but for The majority of Americans Supporting the right to access abortion, the real betrayal was perpetrated by the five justices who initially voted to overturn the landmark case.

This is especially true of the three conservative Supreme Court justices nominated by Donald Trump: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Connie Barrett. During the Senate confirmation hearings, each of these three justices was asked about Roe and Planned Parenthood v Casey, the 1992 case that upheld the right to access to abortion and can now also be overturned.

Comments made by the three justices during those hearings are now under renewed scrutiny, as they face accusations of misleading politicians and the public about their willingness to overthrow Roe.

Republican Senator Susan Collins, who supported Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and repeatedly assured the public that they would not vote to repeal Roe, expressed alarm about the draft opinion and feeling that the judges told her something they later reversed.

“If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and these reports are accurate, it would completely contradict what Judge Gorsuch and Judge Kavanaugh said in our hearings and in our meetings in my office,” Collins said, noting that the draft opinion is not final.

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who also supports abortion rights and voted for the Gorsuch and Barrett nominations, said the draft opinion “shakes my confidence in the court now.”

‘It’s a Precedent’: How Supreme Court Justices Have Talked about Roe v. Wade in the Past – VIDEO

Murkowski reporters Tuesday: “If the decision proceeded as the draft that was in fact disclosed, it wasn’t the direction I thought the court would take based on the statements made about the Roe settlement and it being a precedent.”

During his confirmation hearings in 2017, Gorsuch said: “Casey’s law is stable in the sense that it’s a decision by US Supreme Court. When Kavanaugh appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2018, he similarly described Roe as “an important precedent for the Supreme Court that has been reaffirmed many times,” and defined Casey as “a precedent over precedent” because he endorsed Roe.

But the legal excerpts say Gorsuch and Kavanaugh’s comments about Roe and Casey didn’t make clear how they could vote on a case like Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, raising the possibility that some people only read in their statements what they wanted to hear.

“When people are nominated to the Supreme Court and testify at Senate confirmation hearings, they are very careful about their language,” said Professor Catherine Frank of Columbia Law School. “Something like ‘settled law’ doesn’t actually have a concrete legal meaning. What it means is that this is a decision of the Supreme Court, and I acknowledge its existence. But it doesn’t carry any kind of significance beyond that.”

During the Senate confirmation hearings, Barrett was arguably more careful than Gorsuch and Kavanaugh in her language about Roe. She refused to set Roe as a “super precedent,” meaning it’s a widely accepted case and the court is unlikely to overturn it. Instead, she promised that, if confirmed, she would abide by the “stare at the decision,” the legal principle for cases to be decided on the basis of precedent.

However, Barrett’s writings prior to joining the Supreme Court gave a clear indication of her thoughts on Roe. at 1998 single sheetBarrett and her co-author have defined abortion as “always immoral” from the point of view of the Catholic Church. she too sign out In a 2006 ad he described Roe as a “barbarian”.

“I’m sure Senator Collins and Murkowski both asked specific questions to all of these candidates, trying to get them to say clearly that they weren’t going to eliminate Roe v. Wade,” Frank said. “Maybe Murkowski and Collins heard what they wanted to hear in order to feel better about voting to confirm these candidates, when the rest of the world clearly knows that they are ideologically and legally opposed to abortion.”

For this reason, many progressives expressed little sympathy for Collins and Murkowski when their reaction to the draft opinion was baffling.

“Murkowski voted for Amy Connie Barrett when Trump himself declared that he was appointing judges specifically to overturn Rowe,” Progressive Congressman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Tuesday. “She and Collins betrayed the reproductive rights of the nation when they were single-handedly able to stop the slide. They can’t play the victim now.”

Murkowski voted for the Emmy Connie Barrett when Trump himself announced that he was appointing judges specifically to overturn Rowe.

She and Collins betrayed the nation’s reproductive rights when they were single-handedly able to stem the slide. They can’t play the victim now

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) May 3, 2022

Instead of showing remorse, progressives are calling for Collins and Murkowski to take action to protect abortion rights.

Both Collins and Murkowski have said they support turning Roe into law, but that proposal does not contain the 60 votes needed to overcome the Senate’s deadlock. Progressives are now calling on Collins and Murkowski to support a disruptive hacking process to anchor Roe’s protections in law.

“To save their legacy, Collins and Murkowski must join Democratic senators to do whatever is necessary to protect Roe in federal law,” said Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “No meaningful action will happen without a broken cut now.”

But Collins and Murkowski have so far given no indication that they would support such a cut. Unless they do, the court is ready to overturn nearly 50 years of precedent and erase the national right to access abortion, even though a clear majority of the country would oppose that decision. a CNN Poll A release earlier this year found that 69% of Americans oppose Roe’s overturning, while only 30% support the coup.

If the court goes through with the draft decision, 26 countries will almost certainly or likely ban abortion. These bans may force people to travel far from home to reach countries where abortion is legal, order medicines illegally or attempt to terminate a pregnancy by dangerous means. Many pregnant women will also be forced to carry on unwanted pregnancies.

Collins and Murkowski may have nothing to offer Americans but remorse.

Jessica Glenza of The Guardian contributed to this report