University of California at Davis.
Am J Bioeth. 2022 Aug;22(8):16-21. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2022.2075962. Epub 2022 May 20.
The Supreme Court seems poised to overrule Roe v. Wade and hold that there is no constitutional right to choose abortion. The reversal of Roe seems to run counter to public opinion in the United States-while many favor restrictions, a clear majority do not want Roe reversed and favor access to abortion early in pregnancy. The current Court's apparent willingness to run the risk of political pushback has a complex history. Scholars have long described the Court as a countermajoritarian institution, but in practice, as historians have shown, the Court tends not to stray too far from popular opinion. For a Court bent on reversing Roe and tackling a long list of other divisive topic, concerns about institutional legitimacy no longer appear to be an effective check. A post-Roe Court may be more unplugged from popular opinion, with unpredictable results for the future of the democracy.
最高法院似乎准备推翻罗诉韦德案,并裁定宪法没有赋予选择堕胎的权利。罗诉韦德案的推翻似乎与美国的公众意见相悖——虽然许多人赞成限制堕胎,但绝大多数人并不希望推翻罗诉韦德案,并赞成在怀孕早期获得堕胎的机会。目前,最高法院显然愿意冒险面对政治阻力,这一决定有着复杂的历史背景。学者们长期以来一直将法院描述为反多数派机构,但正如历史学家所表明的那样,实际上,法院往往不会偏离公众意见太远。对于一个一心推翻罗诉韦德案并处理一系列其他有争议话题的法院来说,对机构合法性的担忧似乎不再是有效的制约因素。一个推翻罗诉韦德案后的法院可能会更加脱离民意,这将对民主的未来产生不可预测的结果。