senator, i said that it s settled as a precedent of the supreme court. reporter: susan collins saying if finalized it would be completely inconsistent with what justice gorsuch and justice kavanaugh said most republicans are blasting the stunning breach of supreme court confidentiality insisting the leaker should be punished this is the consequence of the democrats rabidly partisan effort to undermine the court, to attack the court. reporter: noting if roe is overturned abortion would not be outlawed, but states would decide whether it should be legal. this is going to push the conversation back to the people rather than un-elected judges. now democrats are trying to turn this into a major election issue. what s that look like? yeah, that s right. with democrats fearing a possible wipeout in the midterms, a biden advisor says this threat to abortion rights is an opportunity to reenergize their base. the president saying it will fall on voters
the supreme court will talk about settled law. here s a montage of the three most recent supreme court justices being asked about roe v. wade during their hearings. i would tell you that roe versus wade decided in 1973 is a precedent of the united states supreme court. it has been reaffirmed. it s settled as a precedent of the supreme court entitled the respect under principles of stare decisis. it doesn t mean that roe would be overruled. it doesn t small on the handful of cases like brown versus the board that nobody questions anymore. martha: a lot of the people that watched the hearings believe that those individuals were saying that they believed that it would never be overturned or should never be overturned based on any question that might come before the
that congress could ban abortion in the entire country. that s invited in the opinion as well. this is this is, of course, the effect of former president trump nominating three conservative justices and seeing this sea change in the court. let s go back and look at what they said in the confirmation hearings about this. is roe a super precedent? how would you describe a super s super precedent. scholars across the spectrum say that doesn t mean that roe should be overruled. but descriptively it does mean it s not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn t call for overruling. as a judge as an important precedent of the supreme court, by it, i mean roe v. wade and planned parenthood versus casey. and reaffirmed many times, casey is precedent on precedent which
legal analyst joan biscuppic. how do you think this court, with a 6-3 conservative majority will approach this issue? it is a whole new court. and you re right, since 1978 they ve upheld affirmative action but by nearrow votes. this could really change higher education across america. because these practices have traditionally benefited black and hispanic students in the harvard case the challengers say those practices have come at the expense of whites and specially asia americans and it is not hitting as much as the potential cost to asia american as the challengers presented. i should tell that lower courts have sided with harvard and the university of north carolina. they ve referred to precedent of
quote. he also stated that rowe has been reaffirmed many times. i also spoke with judge kavanaugh about this issue in 2018. i asked him whether he believes that rowe was settled law, and if so whether it was correctly settled? justice kavanaugh said that rowe, quote, is settled as a precedent of the supreme court, end quote. he said that rowe, quote, has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years, and most prominently, most importantly reaffirmed in planned parenthood v. casey, end quote, and he described casey as having the value of a precedent on precedent, end quote. i most recently spoke about this issue with justice barrett in 2020.