As the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday over Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case that challenges the precedent of landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade, liberal news outlets nationwide panicked over the possibility that abortions could be restricted. CNN did not disappoint, and featured a number of guest speakers. Inside PoliticsBe concerned about the Supreme Court’s conservative majority.
Many pro-abortion advocates claim that Roe v. Wade will be overturned to abolish abortion. However, it is not true. Each state could make its own abortion laws if Roe was to be overturned. CNN however had problems with the display of federalism.
“This is a case fundamentally about liberty, about personal liberty, about constitutional liberty of women in America,” CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero dramatized. After praising the possibility of overturning 50-years-old precedent, she bowed her head. Of course, Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court case that institutionalized “separate but equal,” was overturned nearly 60 years after it was decided – it’s highly unlikely that Cordero would have had an issue with overturning that precedent.
Host John King solemnly reminded viewers that this all came about due to the election of CNN’s favorite villain, Donald Trump, in 2016:
It is amazing to see that elections and life events can have their consequences. If it weren’t for Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death and Donald Trump’s third Supreme Court appointee, Amy Coney Barrett, this case would have turned out to be very different.
King lamented that abortion would require women to travel long distances to get an abortion, even if states had the right to do so. He also displayed a map of the area to show the difficulties faced by women who want to terminate the lives of unborn children.
CNN’s Nia-Malika Henderson called the potential overturning of Roe a “slippery slope,” claiming that it would lead to “a state-by-state decision on whether or not a state can control essentially family planning and a woman’s womb.” Henderson seems to have forgotten the countless other resources for family planning – and the fact that an unborn baby is a distinct person within the mother, not just part of a womb. States have made it illegal to murder since the beginning.
Cordero returned to the idea that somehow a woman’s liberty was on the line, noting that more than 25 states already have post-Roe “trigger” laws that would restrict or ban abortion if the precedent was overturned: “The Supreme Court really is making the decision whether a woman’s liberty and her ability to make this choice would be affected in this particular case.”
With a 6-3 conservative majority in the Supreme Court, pundits at CNN are desperately afraid that the Court will recognize the absurdity of a “constitutional right to abortion” and will take steps to protect unborn life. So far, the Supreme Court is preparing to make their announcement in June/July 2022.
Safelite and Walmart sponsored this segment.
Click Expand to see the complete transcript.
Inside Politics
12/1/21
12.07:19 pm
JOHN KING: With me in studio, here to share their reporting and their insights, we have CNN’s Dana Bash, CNN’s Nia-Malika Henderson, Seung Min Kim of the Washington Post, and CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero. Carrie Cordero, I would like to begin with you in that Casey was, again, if we listen to the arguments. The then-conservative Court said that we would keep Roe but will state that restrictions can be placed on states as long as there is no undue burden or essentially reasonable restrictions. The argument today was primarily about, well, forget it. Let the Supreme Court declare that this ruling is for the States.
CARRIE CORDERO: Well, I think there’s two fundamental things going on that we heard in the Court’s oral arguments today. First, this case is about liberty. It is about individual liberty. Second, it is about the constitutional freedom of women in America. This is what the case’s merits are all about. But the second piece going on that we heard articulated by the justices in their questioning is this issue of the Court’s precedent, it’s called stare decisis. So that is what it means. The Court intends to reverse 50 years of history going back to Roe, as well as the nearly 30 years since that case was reaffirmed by the Casey court.
KING It would have been an entirely different case and this hearing would have been very different if it wasn’t for Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s passing and Donald Trump’s third Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett. This was evident as the Mississippi solicitor general was explaining his case. Mississippi originally filed to amend its 15-week law to state that it wanted the Court to accept this restriction as reasonable. Mississippi altered its strategy. Listen.
SCOTT STEVART: Roe V. Wade and Planned Parenthood, v. Casey are haunting our nation. They are not supported by the Constitution. They don’t belong anywhere in history and traditions. They’ve damaged the democratic process. They’ve poisoned the law. They are unable to compromise. This court is the only one that recognizes a person’s right to die.
KING: This is a major change in state strategy, because Amy Coney Barrett sits on the bench and not Ruth Bader Ginsburg. John Roberts is left without a place to search for compromises to, say, possibly, reach a compromise decision. They want them to be tossed.
DANA BASH (Yes). This is a long-term, strategic strategy. The long game is exemplified by this. Conservatives have been pushing and pushing hard to pack courts at all levels of government, including the Supreme Court. If you’re looking for political reasons why many conservatives still support Donald Trump today, then the court heard that his nominees did exactly the same thing. We are not sure how they will make their decision. They certainly left a lot of breadcrumbs about where they are going.
KING: Again, right to the point. We could give you a map. Roe v. Wade is thrown out and the decision becomes a case by state. Some women will need to transport or drive hundreds of miles. Some women will have to travel hundreds of miles in order to access an abortion. We will be able to make that decision in the coming months. In the past, the chief justice, who was a champion of precedent and stare decisis, as they say, tried to work with liberals in an attempt to tell them, “Okay, you know, I am a conservative, but we are gonna split the difference here.” Today, he made it clear to Mississippi in his question that your strategy has changed here and makes our decision more complicated.
JOHN ROBERTS. Your first question was about whether any pre-viability restrictions on elective abortions were unconstitutional. Then, I believe it is fair to say, that you switched gears and discussed more whether Roe or Casey should not be overruled.
SCOTT STEPART: This is the harder question.
KING The pro-life movement believes they are on the brink of this moment.
SEUNG MIN KIM : This is a return to what you said earlier about the consequences of presidential elections for the Supreme Court. This was particularly true for President Trump’s second Supreme Court nominee, Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He replaced Justice Anthony Kennedy. One thing I really liked about his comments was the fact that he pointed out several cases of the Supreme Court which overturned prior precedents such as Brown V. the Board of Education. When he spoke to senators trying to win their votes for confirmation, he said that this was not the message he intended. Susan Collins is one of few Republicans who supports abortion rights and stated that Kavanaugh had assured her that Roe V. Wade was settled law. This was definitely not his message today.
KING: That’s right, Justice Kavanaugh, let me read some of his remarks. “If we think the prior precedents are seriously wrong, then why doesn’t the history of the Court’s practice strike those cases, tell us the right answers to actually go to the return of neutrality?” Not what he told Congress.
NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON: Yeah, I mean, listen. Brett Kavanaugh’s statement to Susan Collins was not something that anyone believed. Susan Collins clearly believed it. It is, however, Dana points out, the struggle for the right has been ongoing for many decades. That’s why white evangelicals backed Donald Trump in such large numbers in 2016, When you consider the state-by state decision about whether or not a country can regulate family planning, and women’s wombs, it’s an interesting idea. If Roe V. Wade isn’t overturned, this could be a dangerous slippery slope. It is worth looking at in all the states where it might become reality.
KING: Right. If we reach that point we’ll have both a legal as well as a political discussion about the impact of the court’s decision on the midterm elections year and the election off whenever. Let’s discuss this legally. Justice Kavanaugh has suggested here that the Supreme Court should be removed from all of this. They overturn Roe and overturn Planned Parenthood. This is an obvious decision that has been left to the states. The legal framework is what every state needs to decide. These decisions are then challenged in the courts.
CORDERO There are already laws in over 25 states which would be affected by such a ruling. If the Supreme Court overturns Roe & Casey, then these laws will immediately take effect. Practically, this means that the Supreme Court is deciding whether women’s freedom and ability to choose would be affected. Apart from and I want to take note of the Council for Jackson Women’s Health’s decision, she also took up the issue whether the court should change the previous precedent. The argument she presents is that Mississippi has not made any new arguments. To put it another way, the Supreme Court has to have strong reasons to believe that any of its previous decisions are wrong in order to toss out 50 years worth of its history. Mississippi, she claims, is not making arguments why these are incorrect.
King: There is no legal argument to support this, but we’ll see what the court ultimately interprets as a political decision. That’s all we will do. Can you imagine the drama outside of the Supreme Court this great day?
About Post Author
