John Roberts and Supreme Court Precedents
You decry Justice Roberts’s concurrence in June Medical Services v. Russo, arguing, in part, that his reliance on precedent is misplaced. You claim he ignored precedents “that a plaintiff have an injury due to the law or regulation at hand,” noting the abortion clinics who brought the case don’t have standing to do so “because there is no constitutional right to perform an abortion.”
You don’t note that Louisiana was so eager to wage this battle in the courts, it waived any questions on standing and pleaded with the district court to remove “any cloud upon the validity of its law.” Louisiana certainly felt it would ultimately win.
The Supreme Court deciding June Medical Services isn’t what will “further draw the Court into politics and do even more long-term harm to the judiciary.” It is policy makers who expect the Supreme Court to fight these battles for them.
Anthony Marcum
R Street Institute
Washington
