3 ms·

The opinion piece from about a week ago in the Wall Street Journal reporting this wavering on the margins of the conservative bloc points to a more normal, less

The opinion piece from about a week ago in the Wall Street Journal reporting this wavering on the margins of the conservative bloc points to a more normal, less unprecedented type of leak. So then, one view is that the leak of the draft is just a continuation of that effort to hold the line on the full overturning, and that view seems pretty sensible. On the other hand, what to make of the fact that the leak goes to Politico and not somewhere like the Journal? Do you instead see it as a disgruntled partisan opponent trying to counter the likely leaks that led to the WSJ piece? Or simply a minor smokescreen? I don't think there's any reasonable basis to be particularly sure either way. My gut leans toward the leak having come from the "overturn Roe" camp, but I think most peoples' "gut" on this is pretty highly correlated with their personal views on the topic.

datavirtue 4y ago
The court's top priority, shared by everyone there, is to remain credible. I entertain the possibility that it was leaked to test the public response. So they could make a decision that would be popular (bolster their credibility and appear authoritative). My opinion is that this issue is too contentious and should have been ignored by the court and the entire problem deferred to Congress...but then that expels the court's credibility capital. They can't resist the occasion for authority and pomp. My biased opinion out of the way, I think a growing population of the body politic feels the Supreme Court takes on too much (way out of its lane), and Congress likes to be able to dodge contencious issues (happy to have the court insulate them) and then soapbox after the fact. Waffling on long standing pivotal precident after 50 years smacks of a brewing revolution--in any society. In the words of my sweet little apolitical wife (and mother) after expressing surprise at seeing her participate in discussions about this on facebook: "They are fucking with the wrong people."
- zerocrates 4y ago
  Well one main issue for the court is that, having weighed in with Roe and its successors, they can't help being still involved one way or the other now. More broadly, the ongoing total dysfunction of Congress (and/or the entire political system) has meant both parties have increasingly turned to the relatively-functional court to get their wins. The fact, at least historically, that Supreme Court precedents are seen as quite durable is another factor weighing in favor of the court's involvement. The insulating effect on the politicians is a good point, too. There's also I think the factor that both parties have found it convenient for the Supreme Court to be very powerful and involved in lots of issues just as a motivational factor for their bases: the dialogue around presidential and senatorial races now routinely revolve around Supreme Court appointments as maybe the only important issue.

datavirtue 4y ago

The court's top priority, shared by everyone there, is to remain credible. I entertain the possibility that it was leaked to test the public response. So they could make a decision that would be popular (bolster their credibility and appear authoritative). My opinion is that this issue is too contentious and should have been ignored by the court and the entire problem deferred to Congress...but then that expels the court's credibility capital. They can't resist the occasion for authority and pomp. My biased opinion out of the way, I think a growing population of the body politic feels the Supreme Court takes on too much (way out of its lane), and Congress likes to be able to dodge contencious issues (happy to have the court insulate them) and then soapbox after the fact. Waffling on long standing pivotal precident after 50 years smacks of a brewing revolution--in any society. In the words of my sweet little apolitical wife (and mother) after expressing surprise at seeing her participate in discussions about this on facebook: "They are fucking with the wrong people."

zerocrates 4y ago
Well one main issue for the court is that, having weighed in with Roe and its successors, they can't help being still involved one way or the other now. More broadly, the ongoing total dysfunction of Congress (and/or the entire political system) has meant both parties have increasingly turned to the relatively-functional court to get their wins. The fact, at least historically, that Supreme Court precedents are seen as quite durable is another factor weighing in favor of the court's involvement. The insulating effect on the politicians is a good point, too. There's also I think the factor that both parties have found it convenient for the Supreme Court to be very powerful and involved in lots of issues just as a motivational factor for their bases: the dialogue around presidential and senatorial races now routinely revolve around Supreme Court appointments as maybe the only important issue.