The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Where was Justice Kagan in Dobbs?
The former Dean exercised her right to remain silent to ensure maximum space for negotiation at conference.
Usually, Justice Kagan is one of the Court's most effective questioners. Indeed, she can easily measure the climate of the Court. Her questions are often designed to recruit the Court's moderates to her position. Yet, during Dobbs, Justice Kagan was missing in action.
Her first question didn't appear till page 32 of the transcript. And it wasn't really a question. She went on a long, rambling rant about stare decisis. It stretched more than two full pages in the transcript. She was about as concise as Justice Breyer. At the end, she said "So I guess I just wanted to hear you react to that." Huh? Kagan seemed so unfocused and undisciplined with this question. All of this valuable time could have been used to bolster Kavanaugh, Roberts, and Gorsuch. But Kagan wasted it. And there was no follow-up.
Kagan's second question came during the seriatim round. She asked what the intermediate standard would look like. Again, there was no follow-up question. Or any effort to appeal to the Court's moderates.
Kagan had no questions for Julie Rikelman, counsel for the clinic. She had one question for Solicitor General Prelogar. Again no follow-up question, and nothing during the seriatim round.
What gives? My suspicion is that Kagan exercised her right to remain silent in order to ensure maximum space for negotiation at conference. She will do her level best to moderate the outcome. Kagan may even be willing to uphold Mississippi's law to avoid making any broader pronouncement about Roe and Casey.
I will have much more about the case in a Newsweek piece soon.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What happened to them taking turns to ask questions?
IANAL so I'm not sure, but I seem to remember reading something (maybe on VC?) about how they abandoned that during Zoom sessions and never reinstituted it. It was tied to a discussion of Justice Thomas's increased level of questioning.
Following the return to in-person arguments, they switched to a hybrid system. First any justice can ask questions. Then when the time runs out, each justice, in order, gets a chance to ask follow up questions (what Prof. Blackman appears to be calling the "seriatim round").
"Kagan may even be willing to uphold Mississippi's law to avoid making any broader pronouncement about Roe and Casey."
Wanna bet? None of the democrats on the court have ever upheld an abortion restriction.
Maybe if you pray on it a spell Jesus or the Holy Spirit (or whichever happens to be on call at the time) will bless us and move their hearts to do so . . . or is that 'almighty' talk just sales department puffery?
I could imagine it as some kind of horse trading -- she votes for a weaker verdict to avoid repudiating Roe v Wade. But my Kremlinology is limited to the possible, not the plausible.
Upholding Miss. means a dozen states at least will go to 15 weeks in 2022. Then 12 like Europe, then ...
She won't like being protested when back visiting at Harvard.
If any of them ever did, then they'd find themselves become pariahs instantly.
I also doubt there’s a scenario where another Hustice would substantially compromise in exchange for a compromise on Justice Kagan’s part. She would beed one more Justice besides Justice Roberts? Who could she get? Justice Kavanagh seemed fairly commited to reversing Roe entirely, and Justice Barrett appeared to be looking for arguments that subsequent developments have superceded it.
I love Josh's Supreme Court fan fiction ...
He started Fantasy SCOTUS, after all...
The Undue burden test untethered from viability will be like Potter Stewart's obscenity test "I know it when I see it."
I think that, by far, the biggest bomb dropped in the oral argument was Justice Roberts’ reference to a statement by Justice Blackman in his papers that the viability line in Roe was dicta. None of the counsel were prepared to address this, although I think the Jackson lawyer gave the best argument an unprepared lawyer could give - that viability was central to Casey and in any event became so central to the framework that it couldn’t be considered dicta with respect to the body of precedent as a whole.