David Von Drehle’s May 19 op-ed on Roe v. Wade, “Does the Supreme Court rule, or do its members?,” stated an absolutist position on the Supreme Court’s role in American life. The logic of his position is that once the court interprets the Constitution, that interpretation is no longer open to legitimate challenge, an analogue to the Catholic infallibility doctrine. He routinely excoriated the court, in language that today would be called immoderate in the extreme, over the Dred Scott decision. Tell that to Andrew Jackson, who in his veto of the bank bill, said that each branch must be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Tell that to those who argued for overruling Plessy v. Ferguson, after it had been established precedent for 77 years, 29 years longer than Roe.

Source: Washington Post May 23, 2021 21:00 UTC