There are critics out in force today trying to portray the five justices in the Dobbs majority — plus Chief Justice John Roberts, who was a sixth vote for upholding the Mississippi law and partially overturning the Roe/Casey framework — as having misled the Senate in their confirmation hearings. I did a deep dive into this question last month.

The most egregious claim now being circulated is that Amy Coney Barrett testified that Roe and Casey were “so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling.” CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere:

Confirmation hearing statements on Roe:
Roberts: “settled as a precedent of the court”

Gorsuch: “a good judge will consider it as precedent”

Kavanaugh: “an important precedent”

Barrett “so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling”

— Edward-Isaac Dovere (@IsaacDovere) June 24, 2022

Celeste Headlee:

Amy Coney Barret in confirmation hearing: "Cases [like Roe] are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling."

— Celeste Headlee (@CelesteHeadlee) June 24, 2022

This is flatly false. Barrett was discussing the academic concept of “super-precedents” — a term used by scholars, but with no actual meaning in the courts — which she defined as cases that are “so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling.” Cases such as Marbury v. Madison or Brown v. Board of Education may still have...

Read Full Story: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/what-the-dobbs-majority-said-at-their-s...