Thanks Michael. President elect Donald Trump was asked by Leslie Stall in an interview on Sixty Minutes Last Night whether he wanted to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. He answered that he was pro life and the justices would be pro life. Having to do with abortion, what if it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states, So I would go back to the women won't be able to get at abort,
So it'll go back to the state by state. Perhaps you have to go to I have to go to another state. However, when asked about the issue of marriage equality in the US, Trump said that issue had been settled by the Supreme Court. It's law. I was settled to the Supreme Court. I mean it's done. So even if you appointed judge that it's done it you have these cases have gone to the Supreme Court, They've been settled,
and I think I'm fine with it. So why does Trump think that last year's landmark decision validating same set marriages is settled law? But the landmark decision of Roe v. Wade recognizing abortion rights is not here to help us answer that question? Is Erwin Schamerinsky the dean of the u c. Irvine Law School and prominent constitutional scholar Irwin. Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court in
ninety three, Overfell. The Hodges was decided last year. Is there any difference in what Trump is calling settled law? A Supreme Court precedent is settled only so long as the justices wanted to be settled. If there's five votes to overrule Roe v. Wade, Roe v. Wade will be overruled. If there's five votes to overrule, then Overdges will be overruled.
One is no more settled than the other, Erwin. Is there an argument that Roe v. Wade is actually more settled than than Abergia Fell, given given how old it is, given that the Court has has reaffirmed it UH a couple of times. Of course, the Supreme Court is much more reluctant overrule longstanding precedence. Ro v. Wade was decided in January ninety three, Oberfelt was June of two thou fifteen. Also, the Supreme Court says that it's reluctant overrule decisions when
there's been reliance upon them. Obviously, there's been a great deal of reliance upon ro versus way. But the reality is, I said, if there are five justices who want to overrule Roe v. Wade, it's going to be overruled. If there's five justice want to overrule OVERTHELT, it will be overruled. Now, I think that Roe v. Wade is probably more controversial and will be more controversial in the years ahead than over Society seems to a relatively quickly accepted mirroage equality.
There's a group society who vehemently opposes ro versus Wade. But keep in mind in that regard that Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas and Alito vehement the sense and OVERTHELT. If two justices who are like minded join the Court, there will be five votes to overrule Overthall, just like five votes to overrule Row. And I could easily imagine, given the strong passions involved, that they would want to
do so. Erwin Trump said, it's got a long way to go to Leslie Stall about overturning Roe v. Wade. So let's just talk about timeline. Appointing a pro life justice to fill Justice antonin Scaliah's seat will not do it,
will it? No? Because the Supreme Court on June in Cowan's help tell us that struck down the Texas abortion law, five justices were in the majority there, and they all remain on the court, Briar wrote, joined by Justice Kennedy Ginsburg, they are in Kagan, and so replacing Justice Scalia restores the ideological balance on abortion to what it was before he passed away in February thirteen. The key with the Garden overruling Row is whether the Skins Burke, or Justice
Kennedy or Justice Brier leaves the court. If any one of those three leaves the Court is replaced by an anti abortion justice, then that justice, together with replacement Justice Leah, could join with Roberts, Thomas and Alito to overrule Row Irwin. One place that there was a one could say, relatively
quick overruling of a previous decision. We're in the sodomy cases, where the Supreme Court overruled itself, not really that long after it had said, um, it was constitutional to band sodomy, and then it said it was not homosexual sodomy, that is, and then it said it was not um. Is there any lesson in that experience that we can take from how the Court will approach questions of whether overrule cases like Rowan oberg Felt No. Bowers versus Hardwick was decided
in Lawrence versus Texas overruled in two thousand three. I can certainly identify instances with the Supreme Court much more quickly overruled precedent. Take Citizens United versus Federal Election Commission. It overruled a case it was just seven years old,
McConnell versus Federal Election Commission. I can point to an instance involving whether jurors can be informed of the impact of the victim's death on the community, and the Supreme Court overruled itself just two years after the decision, when Justice Thomas replaced Justice Marshall um so or just to
a relation, Justice Brennan. It just is entirely a matter of when are the five justices who are willing to overrule a precedent or enduring Senate questioning of a potential Supreme Court justice a nominee, how would a pro life justice or a potential justice answer a question about respecting Supreme Court precedent and Roe v. Wade that might come from Democrats, I think that any Republican nominee will say that here she, of course respects President, but here she
cannot talk about any issue that might come before the Court. And with a Republican Senate majority, I think that's going to be a sufficient answer, and the Democrats can ask all they want for something more specific, but there's no way they can force it. Erwin. Back on the subject of of counting justices, one who has always intrigued me is the Chief Justice. Um he voted against the abortion
right side in the most recent case. But based on what you know of him now, if push came to shove and there were a case that asked the Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, how confident are you about which way he would vote. I believe since John Roberts was nominated in two thousand five, that he would be a vote to overrule Roe versus Wade if there was a majority to do that. I can't point any case
where he's ever urged the overruling roversus Wade. However, since coming on the Court in two thousand five, he has voted to uphold every restriction on abortion. I think his descent in the game marriage case overs Hodges shows that there's some more issues where he has very deep convictions, and I think abortion is one of them. Irwin, the president elect died put out a list of judges who he might appoint um and he says that he's going to pick one of them when when he gets inaugurated.
Is that list entirely people who we know for sure would vote to overrule Row? I can't say that because I know some of them. I don't know others of them. There are some on that list that I think would be sure votes. There's others on that list I just don't know very much about. And my guess is they've never told us anything with regard to their views on
Row versus Wade and Irwin. He said that there was a list, but he never said he would specifically pick from that list, did he Well, he first put out a list of ten names, and then he put out a list of another eleven names. I think the expectation has been that he would pick one from those twenty one individuals, but he's not obligated to do so. He can nominate anybody he wants for the Supreme Court. And Irwin, what is your expectation? How long do you think this
process will be? Will it be a very short confirmation process? Since you have Republican majority, or will it be longer since the Democrats might try to drag it out in about thirty seconds, I think it will be a relatively fast process. I'll be interesting to see whether he announces before January he announces just after January. I think the Senate Judiciary Committee will mobilize for hearings as soon as
they can. I think the only question is conceivable to get somebody on the court before the end of this term. Thank you, Erwin Chemerinsky. He is the dean of the u C. Irvine Law School, a prominent constitutional scholar.