Roe Leaks Boost Politicized Supreme Court Perception


The disclosure of a draft Supreme Court opinion that would rule out Roe v. Wade has caused many Americans to doubt whether judges are guided by the law rather than by their political beliefs.

In interviews across the country, even some opponents of abortion have expressed dismay at the way a majority of the courts are united behind a grand draft penned by Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. which would invalidate nearly 50 years of legal access to abortion nationwide.

Rebekah Merkle, a writer and mother of five in Moscow, Idaho, said she thought Supreme Court judges would be “justified as heroes” if they beat Roe v. Wade. But although he approves of the composition of the court, he does not dispute that it finds itself deeply entangled in politics.

“It’s definitely more politicized to me than it used to be,” said Mrs. Merkle. “And partly because politics has gotten really bad lately. And that seems to have an impact on the courts as well.”

Jenny Doyle, a neonatal nurse practitioner and mother of two in Boulder, Colorado, was so distressed by Roe’s news that she considered whether she should leave the country: “I think Iceland sounds good,” she said.

But she is on the same page as Mrs. Merkle in viewing the courts as an increasingly political actor.

“I really believe in term limits on the Supreme Court,” he said, of the judges who can choose to serve until they die. “They’ve lost touch with the real America and the real problem with Americans.”

Scholars and political pundits have regularly debated whether the court’s steady move to the right, exacerbated by increasingly contentious confirmation spats and disputes such as the Senate’s refusal to even hold a hearing on President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick B. fundamental legal forum. It might also be affirming that faith is a ritual now known to conservative aspirants who state their view of Roe as an established law and their respect for precedent—and then apparently choose to overturn it at the first opportunity they get.

Neil Siegel, a Duke University professor of law and political science, said in a statement that trust in the institution was undermined both by the leaks and by the mocking tone of the opinion draft, which he called “amazing and appalling.”

“What the leak and the draft have in common,” he said, “is a disregard for the legal and public legitimacy of the courts — and a failure to note that the judges and their clerks are temporary residents of an institution greater than the self.”

Even before the forthcoming decision to review abortion rights reopens painful national divisions, public confidence in the courts has slumped. A national survey by the Pew Research Center conducted earlier this year found that 54 percent of US adults have a favorable view of the Supreme Court, compared with 65 percent last year.

Most adults — 84 percent — said judges should keep their political views out of their court decisions, but only 16 percent of that group felt the courts did a good or very good job. Over the past three years, Pew found, court approvals have declined 15 percentage points, reaching the least positive rating in nearly four decades.

A Morning Consult-Politico survey released on Wednesday found that about 66 percent of respondents said they support setting a term limit for judges, with about 21 percent disagreeing.

Nicole Lamarche, pastor of the Community United Church of Christ in Boulder, said on Tuesday she was tracing her disappointment at the Republican senator’s blockade of Supreme Court nominee Obama following the death of Judge Antonin Scalia in 2016.


“For me, when they refused to appoint Merrick Garland, or even start the hearing process, for me it was a sign of a different time,” said Lamarche.

But the swift and vicious appointment of three conservative judges during the Trump administration made the court turn right, with Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s confirmation in particular deepening the divide.

In recent months, a congressional investigation into the January 6, 2021, attacks on the Capitol revealed that Ginni Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas, had urged President Donald J. Trump’s chief of staff to overturn the 2020 election results.

For decades, Americans have told pollsters roughly two to one that they support the constitutional right to abortion; as recently as last week, in a Washington Post-ABC News poll, 54 percent of Americans said Roe should be upheld, compared to 28 percent who wanted judges to overturn it.

When the challenge against Roe – in the case about the 15-week abortion ban in Mississippi – was debated in December, and it became clear that five judges were prepared to overrule the decision, Judge Sonia Sotomayor articulated the growing public suspicion.

“Will this institution survive the stench created in the public perception that the Constitution and its readings are merely political acts?” Judge Sotomayor asked.

This week the uneasiness spread from the corridors of power to the coffee shops on Main Street. Even some Republicans expressed their concerns in court after the leaked draft of Judge Alito’s dismissal of Roe’s mockery.

“It shakes my confidence in the courts right now,” said Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, one of the few Republicans in the Senate to support abortion rights.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican with a reputation for independence who presides over the Ohio Supreme Court, was appalled by the spectacle of scandal leaking out in the nation’s highest court. “I’m not easily surprised. It surprised me,” he said. “This has not been completed.”

Americans across the political spectrum express similar doubts.

When Janna Carney, 35, grabs lunch near downtown Los Angeles where she works as creative director in advertising, she said of the judges, “I love the idea that they can’t be owned by anyone, because you can’t vote for them. , they’re not running a campaign.” Now, he said, he had a hard time seeing them as neutral arbitrators.

The country appears to have slipped so far into the “red team vs. blue team” thinking that “we don’t have these nine impartial judges, we count them as team members,” he said. “It feels like our entire system is collapsing. It feels like we are Rome and it’s autumn.”

Others see the same thing, that judges are no longer independent voices that can evolve over time, moving left or right, but akin to a political slate.

“It was a promise for life, and now a political promise,” said Donna Decker, a poet who lives in Tallahassee. “In the past, we were surprised by some appointments. At first, a person may appear conservative, and then choose liberal, and vice versa. That hasn’t happened in recent years. And that caught my attention.”

In Oakland, California, Cesar Ruiz, 27, a technology worker, says he keeps in mind that the five chief justices appointed by the president serve without a popular majority, at least in their first term. When news of the leaked draft appeared on his cell phone, he said, “I remember in high school, learning about the Supreme Court and Roe v. Wade and all the civil rights we earned in those years. Now unelected and undemocraticly appointed courts will simply abolish them.”

However, for many Americans, what is most troubling is the uncertainty about where the courts are headed from here.

“It was a really good shot to take Roe v. Wade, but this is just the beginning,” Fred Johnson, 60, a retired US Army colonel and high school social studies teacher, said from a bar stool at a brewery in Louisville, Ky. “What is next?”