The lawyer who wrote Texas’s abortion ban has a bigger project—disempowering the judiciary—that may appeal to liberals, too. Illustration by Angelica Alzona Before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the lawyer Jonathan Mitchell had crafted a way for the states of Texas and Oklahoma to effectively end abortion access, overriding the federal judiciary and nullifying a constitutional right. His project, however, was not limited to abortion. As Jeannie Suk Gersen explains in a fascinating new story, Mitchell is on a controversial mission “to undermine the Court itself as the final authority on the meaning of the Constitution.” In a rare interview, Mitchell defends his seemingly “heretical” and “lawless” ideas, and explains the ways in which conservatives and liberals alike should go about challenging the Court’s supremacy on issues ranging from guns to campaign finance. “You don’t have to be a chump, you know,” he says. “You don’t have to think your only option is to ask the Supreme Court to overrule precedent.” —Ian Crouch, newsletter editor Support The New Yorker’s award-winning journalism. Subscribe today » |
No comments:
Post a Comment