Perhaps the most riveting moment in Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing on Mississippi’s challenge to abortion rights came from Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Six conservative justices showed their willingness to find any reason at all to erase decades of precedent and gut the right to an abortion in the United States, if not do away with it entirely—just as they were selected by Republican presidents, backed by the big-spending Federalist Society, to do. This puts the legitimacy of this court under Chief Justice John Roberts (that famous “umpire” simply calling “balls and strikes” from the bench) in jeopardy.
Sotomayor homed in on that in her questioning of Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart. “Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” she asked. “I don’t see how it is possible.” With that one question, Sotomayor just explained why her institution has to be reformed—and why court expansion is so essential.
No one can honestly look at this court—reviewing all the arguments put forward by those six conservatives—and not see a wholly politicized majority. Amy Coney Barrett even took the opportunity to bring anti-vaxx rhetoric into the mix. Brett Kavanaugh went out of his way to prove he was lying to Sen. Susan Collins when he said that he considered Roe v. Wade settled law and respects legal precedent. Samuel Alito went so far as to toss out all the science and suggest that life begins at conception.
In just one morning, they erased all the public relations efforts they’ve undertaken since the issue of court expansion has become prevalent and possible, and proven what the majority of Americans—61% of us—believe: that the Court is “mainly” motivated by politics. Sotomayor was sending a clear warning to her colleagues Wednesday: They are delegitimizing the court more and more with every extremist decision they make.
So, yes, it makes expanding the court a more salient and more urgent issue. Here’s one respected courtwatcher’s take on that, Dahlia Lithwick, who has been tepid to the idea of changing the court. She’s over any fear she had on that front.
Speaking of smoldering embers, here’s Sotomayor with the last word: “If people actually believe that this is all political, how will we survive? How will the court survive?”
Sotomayor homed in on that in her questioning of Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart. “Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” she asked. “I don’t see how it is possible.” With that one question, Sotomayor just explained why her institution has to be reformed—and why court expansion is so essential.
No one can honestly look at this court—reviewing all the arguments put forward by those six conservatives—and not see a wholly politicized majority. Amy Coney Barrett even took the opportunity to bring anti-vaxx rhetoric into the mix. Brett Kavanaugh went out of his way to prove he was lying to Sen. Susan Collins when he said that he considered Roe v. Wade settled law and respects legal precedent. Samuel Alito went so far as to toss out all the science and suggest that life begins at conception.
In just one morning, they erased all the public relations efforts they’ve undertaken since the issue of court expansion has become prevalent and possible, and proven what the majority of Americans—61% of us—believe: that the Court is “mainly” motivated by politics. Sotomayor was sending a clear warning to her colleagues Wednesday: They are delegitimizing the court more and more with every extremist decision they make.
So, yes, it makes expanding the court a more salient and more urgent issue. Here’s one respected courtwatcher’s take on that, Dahlia Lithwick, who has been tepid to the idea of changing the court. She’s over any fear she had on that front.
Speaking of smoldering embers, here’s Sotomayor with the last word: “If people actually believe that this is all political, how will we survive? How will the court survive?”