"Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote nothing when the Supreme Court repudiated the constitutional right to abortion in the decision three years ago. She wasn't obliged to write, of course; it was her vote that counted, the crucial fifth vote that gave Justice Samuel Alito his majority. Still, her silence stood out, and not only because two other members of the majority, Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh, wrote concurring opinions to explain their contrasting views of the decision's larger implications."
"I thought at the time that, considering the rushed confirmation in the first Trump administration's waning weeks that gave her the seat long held by one of the court's strongest supporters of abortion rights, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she owed the country some kind of statement. Dobbs wouldn't have happened without her, after all. I suppose I wanted some acknowledgment of that fact, some indication that she had not only cast her vote but owned it."
Justice Amy Coney Barrett cast the crucial fifth vote that enabled the Supreme Court to repudiate the constitutional right to abortion yet did not write an opinion. Two other majority justices filed concurrences explaining broader implications. Barrett's confirmation had been rushed during the final weeks of the first Trump administration, replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Observers expected some acknowledgement or explanation from Barrett. During oral argument she dismissed the equality-based Casey rationale by pointing to safe-haven laws that allow anonymous infant surrender, implying bearing a child need not impede professional advancement. That remark raised concern given her personal history of five pregnancies.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]