1
00:00:03,160 --> 00:00:13,160
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:14,960 --> 00:00:18,600
Speaker 1: The stunning leak of the draft of Justice Alito's opinion

3
00:00:18,800 --> 00:00:23,440
Speaker 1: overturning Roe v. Wade has led to demonstrations across the country,

4
00:00:23,680 --> 00:00:27,560
Speaker 1: a doomed attempt by Senate Democrats to establish a federal

5
00:00:27,680 --> 00:00:32,160
Speaker 1: right to abortion, fences being erected around the Supreme Court building,

6
00:00:32,400 --> 00:00:35,880
Speaker 1: and a lot of speculation about the repercautions of ending

7
00:00:35,920 --> 00:00:40,240
Speaker 1: the half century old right to abortion, including from Treasury

8
00:00:40,280 --> 00:00:45,200
Speaker 1: Secretary Janet Yellen, who warned Congress that reversing Row would

9
00:00:45,200 --> 00:00:48,520
Speaker 1: have a negative effect on the economy. I believe that

10
00:00:48,640 --> 00:00:53,800
Speaker 1: eliminating the right of women to make decisions about when

11
00:00:53,840 --> 00:00:57,920
Speaker 1: in whether to have children would have very damaging effects

12
00:00:58,560 --> 00:01:03,639
Speaker 1: on the economy and would set women back decades. Growphy

13
00:01:03,720 --> 00:01:09,560
Speaker 1: Wade in access to reproductive health care, including abortion, helped

14
00:01:09,640 --> 00:01:15,640
Speaker 1: lead to increase labor force participation. It enabled many women

15
00:01:15,840 --> 00:01:20,960
Speaker 1: to finish school that increase their earning potential. My guest

16
00:01:21,040 --> 00:01:24,360
Speaker 1: is Mary Ziegler, a professor at you See Davis Law School.

17
00:01:24,920 --> 00:01:27,800
Speaker 1: Is this the first time the Supreme Court would be

18
00:01:27,920 --> 00:01:33,360
Speaker 1: overturning precedent to eliminate a constitutional right? The only other

19
00:01:33,440 --> 00:01:36,840
Speaker 1: case you could maybe site is you know, Lochner, which

20
00:01:37,640 --> 00:01:41,200
Speaker 1: was the constitutional right to contract, freedom of contract. But

21
00:01:41,600 --> 00:01:43,840
Speaker 1: I think obviously that's case. It was different because in

22
00:01:43,840 --> 00:01:48,080
Speaker 1: practice it sort of served to undercut minimum wage laws

23
00:01:48,120 --> 00:01:51,840
Speaker 1: and other laws. It wasn't often invoked by workers to

24
00:01:52,480 --> 00:01:55,160
Speaker 1: protect themselves, although it sometimes was, So I think this

25
00:01:55,240 --> 00:01:57,720
Speaker 1: is I mean, certainly one of the only times. That's

26
00:01:57,720 --> 00:01:59,640
Speaker 1: not the only time the court has taken away right

27
00:01:59,680 --> 00:02:03,160
Speaker 1: like this. Some states have trigger laws which kick in

28
00:02:03,720 --> 00:02:08,400
Speaker 1: if Rowe is overturned. This draft decision leaves abortion to

29
00:02:08,480 --> 00:02:12,000
Speaker 1: the states, and that would mean a patchwork of abortion

30
00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:15,480
Speaker 1: laws across the country. Tell us about the range of

31
00:02:15,600 --> 00:02:19,440
Speaker 1: restrictions we could see on abortion. So I mean, we

32
00:02:19,480 --> 00:02:23,520
Speaker 1: don't even entirely know the full range of constraints because

33
00:02:23,520 --> 00:02:26,600
Speaker 1: states are still hashing out exactly what they mean by

34
00:02:26,639 --> 00:02:29,799
Speaker 1: abortion in terms of whether that's going to sweep in

35
00:02:30,080 --> 00:02:34,440
Speaker 1: other pregnancy adjacent things like i U D S or

36
00:02:34,600 --> 00:02:36,960
Speaker 1: the morning after pill. The governor of Mississippi was on

37
00:02:37,040 --> 00:02:38,920
Speaker 1: CNN just the other day and was not willing to

38
00:02:38,960 --> 00:02:41,400
Speaker 1: answer a question about whether those would be included in

39
00:02:41,400 --> 00:02:44,520
Speaker 1: abortion vans or you know, steps and infertility treatment like

40
00:02:44,560 --> 00:02:46,920
Speaker 1: in vitro fertilization, and they're trying to figure out how

41
00:02:47,000 --> 00:02:49,120
Speaker 1: they're actually going to enforce these laws. But we do

42
00:02:49,200 --> 00:02:52,360
Speaker 1: know that somewhere in the ballpark of past, the states

43
00:02:52,360 --> 00:02:56,160
Speaker 1: are going to criminalize virtually all abortions within a very

44
00:02:56,200 --> 00:02:58,720
Speaker 1: short period of time after Roe comes down. And then

45
00:02:58,720 --> 00:03:00,640
Speaker 1: it's just a matter of what exactly that means on

46
00:03:00,639 --> 00:03:04,239
Speaker 1: the ground when you say criminalize, make it a crime

47
00:03:04,280 --> 00:03:06,200
Speaker 1: for a woman to get an abortion, or make it

48
00:03:06,240 --> 00:03:09,200
Speaker 1: a crime for a doctor to perform an abortion. The

49
00:03:09,320 --> 00:03:12,200
Speaker 1: first round of these laws seem to be focused primarily

50
00:03:12,240 --> 00:03:14,200
Speaker 1: on making it a crime for a doctor to perform

51
00:03:14,200 --> 00:03:17,160
Speaker 1: an abortion, and perhaps for people to aid or a

52
00:03:17,200 --> 00:03:20,160
Speaker 1: bet that doctor in performing the abortion. But we've already

53
00:03:20,200 --> 00:03:22,720
Speaker 1: seen that that's up for debate. Louisiana has a bill

54
00:03:23,040 --> 00:03:27,400
Speaker 1: moving through that legislature that would also authorize the punishment

55
00:03:27,520 --> 00:03:30,399
Speaker 1: of pregnant people and women, So at the moment that's

56
00:03:30,440 --> 00:03:33,320
Speaker 1: not on the table, but we've seen states begin to

57
00:03:33,360 --> 00:03:38,280
Speaker 1: consider the possibility. What about self managed abortions. There was

58
00:03:38,320 --> 00:03:41,720
Speaker 1: the Texas woman who was arrested when she was reported

59
00:03:41,760 --> 00:03:45,280
Speaker 1: by the hospital staff. She was arrested on murder charges,

60
00:03:45,600 --> 00:03:49,920
Speaker 1: and then the prosecutor dropped them because there's no such

61
00:03:50,000 --> 00:03:54,000
Speaker 1: crime in Texas. So yeah, well, some managed abortions are

62
00:03:54,000 --> 00:03:56,160
Speaker 1: I think going to be one of the next fronts

63
00:03:56,240 --> 00:03:59,560
Speaker 1: in the conflict because what you saw, I think in

64
00:03:59,600 --> 00:04:01,840
Speaker 1: that tech this example is that on the one hand,

65
00:04:01,960 --> 00:04:05,080
Speaker 1: many red states, including Texas, have committed in law to

66
00:04:05,280 --> 00:04:10,080
Speaker 1: not punishing patients. But there's also I think attention because

67
00:04:10,440 --> 00:04:13,440
Speaker 1: in many cases of self managed abortion, there will be

68
00:04:13,480 --> 00:04:15,360
Speaker 1: no one else for the state to punish. The state

69
00:04:15,360 --> 00:04:17,560
Speaker 1: will be unable, for example, in the case of Lozelle

70
00:04:17,560 --> 00:04:20,320
Speaker 1: Carreira out of Texas, to punish a doctor in Mexico,

71
00:04:20,839 --> 00:04:24,360
Speaker 1: or to punish a doctor who's mailing pills from the Netherlands,

72
00:04:24,680 --> 00:04:26,880
Speaker 1: or to punish a doctor in the state like Connecticut,

73
00:04:26,880 --> 00:04:30,000
Speaker 1: which has recently passed a lawsiting it won't extradite doctors

74
00:04:30,040 --> 00:04:32,600
Speaker 1: to face criminal charges. So that essentially means the only

75
00:04:32,640 --> 00:04:35,520
Speaker 1: person who could be punished as the person managing the abortion.

76
00:04:35,680 --> 00:04:38,040
Speaker 1: So I think we're going to see states faced with,

77
00:04:38,279 --> 00:04:41,719
Speaker 1: you know, in their view, difficult decision between punishing people

78
00:04:41,880 --> 00:04:45,440
Speaker 1: who have abortions or just not enforcing their laws. Several

79
00:04:45,480 --> 00:04:49,520
Speaker 1: big employers like City Group, Yelp, and Uber have pledged

80
00:04:49,560 --> 00:04:53,760
Speaker 1: to pay travel expenses if their employees can't access an

81
00:04:53,760 --> 00:04:57,839
Speaker 1: abortion in their home state. Would those companies be targeted

82
00:04:57,880 --> 00:05:02,600
Speaker 1: next by by states. It's possible that they would be

83
00:05:02,640 --> 00:05:06,360
Speaker 1: considered um to have aided or revetted someone having an abortion.

84
00:05:06,400 --> 00:05:09,920
Speaker 1: I would be really surprised if read states went after

85
00:05:09,960 --> 00:05:13,960
Speaker 1: companies because they're they're already quite likely to be or

86
00:05:14,040 --> 00:05:18,520
Speaker 1: probably concerned that they will face adverse business consequences from

87
00:05:18,560 --> 00:05:21,200
Speaker 1: their positions on abortion. And I think it's possible that

88
00:05:21,279 --> 00:05:24,280
Speaker 1: these steps taken by employers to fund travel for their

89
00:05:24,320 --> 00:05:27,200
Speaker 1: workers maybe a first step. You may see something later

90
00:05:27,279 --> 00:05:30,960
Speaker 1: resembling the boycotts you saw with North Carolina and policy

91
00:05:30,960 --> 00:05:33,960
Speaker 1: on transgender people using the restroom of their choice. And

92
00:05:34,000 --> 00:05:37,480
Speaker 1: so if states do aggressively go after companies, they're almost

93
00:05:37,520 --> 00:05:41,120
Speaker 1: welcoming a more kind of robust reaction from the corporate

94
00:05:41,120 --> 00:05:44,359
Speaker 1: community that that one that may be coming anyway. The

95
00:05:44,440 --> 00:05:47,720
Speaker 1: next battleground, well, there are a few battlegrounds. So let's

96
00:05:47,720 --> 00:05:51,200
Speaker 1: say one of the next battlegrounds is states trying to

97
00:05:51,360 --> 00:05:55,760
Speaker 1: stop their residents from traveling across state lines to terminate

98
00:05:55,880 --> 00:05:59,920
Speaker 1: a pregnancy. Can states enforce their laws beyond their border?

99
00:06:00,520 --> 00:06:03,280
Speaker 1: The answer is, we don't know, so the extra territorial

100
00:06:03,520 --> 00:06:06,520
Speaker 1: application of these laws is something that hasn't or even

101
00:06:06,560 --> 00:06:08,960
Speaker 1: really any laws, is something that hasn't been dealt with

102
00:06:09,080 --> 00:06:12,120
Speaker 1: a lot in recent history. We have one case that

103
00:06:12,240 --> 00:06:14,839
Speaker 1: isn't really directly on point from the Row era, and

104
00:06:14,880 --> 00:06:17,000
Speaker 1: then to look back further, you really have to go

105
00:06:17,080 --> 00:06:19,880
Speaker 1: to the days of kind of fugitive slave disputes to

106
00:06:19,920 --> 00:06:22,960
Speaker 1: really get into this kind of interstate war. So I

107
00:06:23,040 --> 00:06:25,280
Speaker 1: don't know is the answer, and so that's one of

108
00:06:25,360 --> 00:06:28,640
Speaker 1: the reasons you see blue states anticipating these struggles and

109
00:06:28,720 --> 00:06:31,279
Speaker 1: passing laws like the one in Connecticut essentially saying we're

110
00:06:31,320 --> 00:06:34,520
Speaker 1: not going to comply with these requests. But how those

111
00:06:34,560 --> 00:06:37,200
Speaker 1: disputes will be resolved, Whether what the red state would

112
00:06:37,240 --> 00:06:40,520
Speaker 1: be doing would be constitutional is unclear. Which states law

113
00:06:40,600 --> 00:06:43,800
Speaker 1: would apply in those circumstances is unclear. And the great

114
00:06:43,839 --> 00:06:46,320
Speaker 1: irony of it all, of course, is that if that's contested,

115
00:06:46,640 --> 00:06:49,039
Speaker 1: gonna end right back up in the Supreme Court, which

116
00:06:49,040 --> 00:06:51,360
Speaker 1: in this draft is telling us that, you know, things

117
00:06:51,360 --> 00:06:53,480
Speaker 1: are going to become much more peaceful when the Court

118
00:06:53,520 --> 00:06:55,600
Speaker 1: gets out of the abortion business. And this goes back

119
00:06:55,600 --> 00:06:59,599
Speaker 1: to the states. Practically, I'm wondering how they would enforce

120
00:06:59,680 --> 00:07:02,839
Speaker 1: it unless they had a law like Texas is, which

121
00:07:02,920 --> 00:07:06,800
Speaker 1: makes every citizen and enforce or a bounty hunter. Yeah,

122
00:07:06,800 --> 00:07:09,760
Speaker 1: there are lots of different possibilities. I think one possibility

123
00:07:09,800 --> 00:07:14,000
Speaker 1: is sort of digital surveillance. There are potential ways people

124
00:07:14,080 --> 00:07:17,360
Speaker 1: can get caught. Law enforcement can buy your search data,

125
00:07:17,720 --> 00:07:21,400
Speaker 1: they can troll your social media. There may be programs

126
00:07:21,520 --> 00:07:25,119
Speaker 1: along those lines. There are likely going to be people

127
00:07:25,160 --> 00:07:29,040
Speaker 1: who are found out when they seek treatment for medical complications,

128
00:07:29,040 --> 00:07:31,680
Speaker 1: which is terrible because it's going to disincentivize people from

129
00:07:31,680 --> 00:07:35,760
Speaker 1: seeking treatment for medical complications, including for conditions that aren't

130
00:07:35,800 --> 00:07:39,480
Speaker 1: abortion like miscarriages. And then I think finally, people are

131
00:07:39,560 --> 00:07:41,559
Speaker 1: likely to be caught the same way people are caught

132
00:07:41,600 --> 00:07:44,160
Speaker 1: for using marijuana, which is to say, people in the

133
00:07:44,200 --> 00:07:47,040
Speaker 1: most highly policed communities will be more likely to be

134
00:07:47,080 --> 00:07:49,760
Speaker 1: found out just simply because they're having more interactions with

135
00:07:49,840 --> 00:07:53,480
Speaker 1: law enforcement, which I think would most likely be unsurprisingly right,

136
00:07:53,560 --> 00:07:56,240
Speaker 1: people of color, low income people, people who are already

137
00:07:56,320 --> 00:08:01,160
Speaker 1: disproportunately affected by the criminal justice system. Another next battleground

138
00:08:01,600 --> 00:08:05,720
Speaker 1: is medication abortion or abortion pills, which account for more

139
00:08:05,720 --> 00:08:09,160
Speaker 1: than half of recent abortions. Is this the most workable

140
00:08:09,240 --> 00:08:13,400
Speaker 1: option in the future for getting an abortion. It may

141
00:08:13,440 --> 00:08:18,000
Speaker 1: well be medication abortion. Obviously isn't applicable throughout pregnancy at

142
00:08:18,040 --> 00:08:20,480
Speaker 1: the moment. The FDA only authorizes it for the first

143
00:08:20,520 --> 00:08:24,080
Speaker 1: ten weeks, but it is becoming the preferred method and

144
00:08:24,120 --> 00:08:26,640
Speaker 1: it is relatively hard to trace. It is something that

145
00:08:26,680 --> 00:08:29,680
Speaker 1: people can get in states who are abortion is illegal

146
00:08:29,880 --> 00:08:33,760
Speaker 1: from organizations like aid Access that operates internationally. But I

147
00:08:33,800 --> 00:08:36,679
Speaker 1: think in a poster real world, no abortion method will

148
00:08:36,720 --> 00:08:41,000
Speaker 1: be really free of potential consequences for people seeking it. Unfortunately,

149
00:08:41,440 --> 00:08:45,239
Speaker 1: some states also banned the use of telemedicine for abortion,

150
00:08:45,320 --> 00:08:47,800
Speaker 1: So is that a way of cutting people off from

151
00:08:47,840 --> 00:08:51,319
Speaker 1: these pills. It may be. Um So states are already

152
00:08:51,320 --> 00:08:54,920
Speaker 1: trying to prevent telemedicine abortion. Nineteen of them have laws

153
00:08:54,920 --> 00:08:56,880
Speaker 1: in place to do this, and of course they'll expand

154
00:08:56,920 --> 00:09:00,280
Speaker 1: those prohibitions to just outlaw a worship altogether in looting

155
00:09:00,320 --> 00:09:03,200
Speaker 1: medication abortion. So there's already kind of an arms race

156
00:09:03,280 --> 00:09:06,359
Speaker 1: between states trying to shut down access to these pills

157
00:09:06,400 --> 00:09:09,840
Speaker 1: and groups that support abortion rights trying to circumvent those laws.

158
00:09:10,360 --> 00:09:13,000
Speaker 1: What other areas do you think are going to be

159
00:09:13,200 --> 00:09:17,199
Speaker 1: battlegrounds or litigated coming up? They'll be questions about how

160
00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:21,040
Speaker 1: broadly the state defines abortion and whether those broad definitions

161
00:09:21,080 --> 00:09:24,480
Speaker 1: create any constitutional questions. For example, if the state bans

162
00:09:24,520 --> 00:09:27,520
Speaker 1: in vitro fertilization or if the state bands I U

163
00:09:27,600 --> 00:09:29,920
Speaker 1: D S, you know, does that raise constitutional questions? I

164
00:09:29,960 --> 00:09:32,400
Speaker 1: think they'll be questions as you mentioned about out of

165
00:09:32,440 --> 00:09:35,000
Speaker 1: state travel, and I think finally they'll be questions about

166
00:09:35,000 --> 00:09:37,600
Speaker 1: whether there will be a nationwide ban on abortion, something

167
00:09:37,600 --> 00:09:40,840
Speaker 1: that we've seen Congressional Republicans float, and something also that

168
00:09:40,880 --> 00:09:43,360
Speaker 1: anti abortion groups are asking the Supreme Court to do

169
00:09:43,360 --> 00:09:46,840
Speaker 1: down the road by essentially recognizing the person put of

170
00:09:46,840 --> 00:09:49,120
Speaker 1: the fetis or on board child. Does it seem clear

171
00:09:49,160 --> 00:09:53,440
Speaker 1: to you that contraception is another target ahead, potentially, because

172
00:09:53,559 --> 00:09:56,479
Speaker 1: within the anti abortion movement, they are very different definitions

173
00:09:56,520 --> 00:09:58,840
Speaker 1: of what counts us an abortion inducing drug, and that

174
00:09:58,880 --> 00:10:02,359
Speaker 1: can often sweep in some of what most people consider contraceptive.

175
00:10:02,400 --> 00:10:04,640
Speaker 1: So it would not surprise me if at least some

176
00:10:04,720 --> 00:10:08,320
Speaker 1: states sweep in some forms of contraception in their abortion bands,

177
00:10:08,480 --> 00:10:11,679
Speaker 1: because I think unbeknownst to most Americans, there's a live

178
00:10:11,720 --> 00:10:14,840
Speaker 1: battle for some time about what aborsition means, not just

179
00:10:14,920 --> 00:10:17,920
Speaker 1: whether it should be legal. Does Aldo's reason a name

180
00:10:18,040 --> 00:10:21,840
Speaker 1: that other constitutional rights that, to quote him, are not

181
00:10:22,080 --> 00:10:26,000
Speaker 1: deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition, like gay

182
00:10:26,040 --> 00:10:29,480
Speaker 1: marriage could be in jeopardy. Well, we've seen sometimes of

183
00:10:29,559 --> 00:10:32,720
Speaker 1: it in parts. Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas has already

184
00:10:32,960 --> 00:10:35,880
Speaker 1: very publicly argued that the Supreme Court's decision on gay

185
00:10:35,920 --> 00:10:39,040
Speaker 1: marriage was wrongly decided. The reasoning of the draft could

186
00:10:39,080 --> 00:10:42,520
Speaker 1: easily apply to any of the Court's jurisprudence on a

187
00:10:42,600 --> 00:10:46,480
Speaker 1: substantive due process rights of privacy, including same sex marriage.

188
00:10:46,600 --> 00:10:49,240
Speaker 1: So I think it's a question of one, do states

189
00:10:49,480 --> 00:10:52,120
Speaker 1: do something that would give rise to a case? And

190
00:10:52,440 --> 00:10:54,760
Speaker 1: who does the Court really want to take down the

191
00:10:54,960 --> 00:10:58,160
Speaker 1: entirety of substantive due process jurisprudence. And I don't think

192
00:10:58,160 --> 00:11:00,559
Speaker 1: the answer to that is yes today. But I think

193
00:11:00,600 --> 00:11:02,559
Speaker 1: if you're looking five or ten years down the road,

194
00:11:02,600 --> 00:11:05,480
Speaker 1: I imagine you'll get a different answer. Finally, and you

195
00:11:05,559 --> 00:11:08,640
Speaker 1: refer to this, but do you think the five justices

196
00:11:08,960 --> 00:11:13,240
Speaker 1: who allegedly voted for this knew the can of worms

197
00:11:13,360 --> 00:11:16,920
Speaker 1: they were opening and how this would further divide an

198
00:11:16,960 --> 00:11:20,400
Speaker 1: already divided country, or did they just not care? I

199
00:11:20,440 --> 00:11:22,520
Speaker 1: think that they don't care. Is a fairer reading at

200
00:11:22,600 --> 00:11:24,640
Speaker 1: least of the draft. The draft mor orlist says they

201
00:11:24,679 --> 00:11:27,400
Speaker 1: don't care. So the draft essentially says, our job is

202
00:11:27,440 --> 00:11:30,320
Speaker 1: to interpret the law, and if that, you know, destroys

203
00:11:30,360 --> 00:11:32,680
Speaker 1: the country all along the way, that's really not our problem.

204
00:11:32,960 --> 00:11:35,200
Speaker 1: The irony, of course, is that one of the arguments

205
00:11:35,280 --> 00:11:38,200
Speaker 1: the draft offers for undoing Row is that it polarized

206
00:11:38,200 --> 00:11:41,439
Speaker 1: the debate and deepened the country's divide. And so it's strange,

207
00:11:41,520 --> 00:11:43,720
Speaker 1: to say the least, that the Court seems disinterested in

208
00:11:43,760 --> 00:11:45,920
Speaker 1: whether it's about to do that again in this decision.

209
00:11:46,120 --> 00:11:49,720
Speaker 1: Thanks Mary, that's professor Mary Ziegler of u C. Davis

210
00:11:49,800 --> 00:11:54,400
Speaker 1: Law School. The Senate rushed into an almost certain to

211
00:11:54,440 --> 00:11:58,240
Speaker 1: fail vote toward enshrining Roe v. Wade abortion access as

212
00:11:58,320 --> 00:12:01,800
Speaker 1: federal law. The roll call promised to be the first

213
00:12:01,840 --> 00:12:05,800
Speaker 1: of several efforts in Congress to preserve the nearly fifty

214
00:12:05,880 --> 00:12:10,000
Speaker 1: year old court ruling, which declares a constitutional right to abortion,

215
00:12:10,320 --> 00:12:13,680
Speaker 1: but it's likely to be overturned by five conservative members

216
00:12:13,679 --> 00:12:17,320
Speaker 1: of the Supreme Court. My guest is Elizabeth Sepper, a

217
00:12:17,360 --> 00:12:21,280
Speaker 1: professor at the University of Texas Law School. Aldo's is

218
00:12:21,320 --> 00:12:25,160
Speaker 1: a draft opinion. Does it matter if the language is

219
00:12:25,320 --> 00:12:29,280
Speaker 1: changed in the final opinion, if Row is still reversed,

220
00:12:30,000 --> 00:12:35,320
Speaker 1: a change in the language might limit the immediate repercussions

221
00:12:35,360 --> 00:12:40,719
Speaker 1: of the opinion beyond reproductive health and beyond abortion. So

222
00:12:40,760 --> 00:12:44,920
Speaker 1: we could see reasoning that would let us know that

223
00:12:45,360 --> 00:12:50,640
Speaker 1: same sex marriage and contraception, for instance, are not under

224
00:12:50,840 --> 00:12:54,280
Speaker 1: immediate threat. But Justice Alito's opinion doesn't give us any

225
00:12:54,320 --> 00:12:58,400
Speaker 1: such reassurance. He says, they're not under threat. But you know,

226
00:12:58,440 --> 00:13:02,200
Speaker 1: I just wonder it the way they're overturning precedent, not

227
00:13:02,280 --> 00:13:04,640
Speaker 1: only in this case but in other cases, whether you

228
00:13:04,679 --> 00:13:08,400
Speaker 1: can really believe that. I think there are two points. First,

229
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:13,280
Speaker 1: the court is quite political, and the five radical justices

230
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:16,040
Speaker 1: on the Supreme Court all told us that they were

231
00:13:16,080 --> 00:13:20,160
Speaker 1: not interested in overturning Roge Wade, that it was precedent

232
00:13:20,320 --> 00:13:23,480
Speaker 1: that they would stick to. So we've already seen that that,

233
00:13:23,600 --> 00:13:26,679
Speaker 1: in fact, is not the direction in which they are going.

234
00:13:27,080 --> 00:13:31,240
Speaker 1: The second point is that Justice Alito's opinion uses a

235
00:13:31,440 --> 00:13:35,240
Speaker 1: test that looks to whether a rate is deeply rooted

236
00:13:35,320 --> 00:13:39,559
Speaker 1: in history and tradition, and if it's not, he says,

237
00:13:39,559 --> 00:13:42,960
Speaker 1: while the Constitution doesn't protect that right, but we know

238
00:13:43,120 --> 00:13:46,400
Speaker 1: that lots of what we consider to be our fundamental

239
00:13:46,520 --> 00:13:51,040
Speaker 1: constitutional rights, including right to contraception, arguably could be said

240
00:13:51,120 --> 00:13:55,600
Speaker 1: not to be deeply rooted in history and tradition. So

241
00:13:56,000 --> 00:14:01,719
Speaker 1: under Alida's reasoning, our contraceptive that at after conception, like

242
00:14:01,840 --> 00:14:04,600
Speaker 1: I U D S or the morning after pill, are

243
00:14:04,640 --> 00:14:08,640
Speaker 1: they considered abortion. So uh, there are a number of

244
00:14:08,679 --> 00:14:13,360
Speaker 1: forms of emergency contraception, and the primary and for many

245
00:14:13,400 --> 00:14:16,920
Speaker 1: of them, the exclusive mechanism of action is to prevent

246
00:14:17,520 --> 00:14:22,080
Speaker 1: fertilization of the egg with sperm um. Some of them

247
00:14:22,160 --> 00:14:28,680
Speaker 1: may prevent implantation, but with the possible exception of an

248
00:14:28,720 --> 00:14:30,680
Speaker 1: I E D of a particular type of io D,

249
00:14:31,000 --> 00:14:35,920
Speaker 1: they don't interfere with an implanted pregnancy. So from a

250
00:14:35,960 --> 00:14:41,680
Speaker 1: medical standpoint, From a scientific standpoint, emergency contraception has nothing

251
00:14:41,800 --> 00:14:46,840
Speaker 1: to do with ending a pregnancy. From a religious point

252
00:14:47,080 --> 00:14:51,040
Speaker 1: of view, however, uh, you know, there are religious groups

253
00:14:51,080 --> 00:14:54,880
Speaker 1: that believe that life begins at what they call conception.

254
00:14:54,960 --> 00:14:57,400
Speaker 1: This is not a medical term, but they mean the

255
00:14:57,440 --> 00:15:02,480
Speaker 1: fertilization of an egg with a sperm and in that case,

256
00:15:03,320 --> 00:15:07,880
Speaker 1: loss of what we think of as distinctly contraceptive becomes

257
00:15:07,920 --> 00:15:12,880
Speaker 1: a mechanism that ends a potential future life and proples.

258
00:15:12,920 --> 00:15:16,480
Speaker 1: More to the point right, we have seen Justice Alito

259
00:15:16,920 --> 00:15:20,880
Speaker 1: in opinions for the Supreme Court, the Hobby Lobby opinion,

260
00:15:20,960 --> 00:15:24,120
Speaker 1: for example, Little Sisters of the Poor. We also saw

261
00:15:24,680 --> 00:15:30,160
Speaker 1: um emergency contraception referred to as an abortiveacients. So this

262
00:15:30,320 --> 00:15:34,040
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearings used exactly the same language.

263
00:15:34,120 --> 00:15:36,760
Speaker 1: This is not true as a matter of science and fact,

264
00:15:37,160 --> 00:15:40,400
Speaker 1: but it is the religious perspective, it would seem of

265
00:15:40,480 --> 00:15:45,920
Speaker 1: these particular justices. So is contraception the next target of

266
00:15:45,960 --> 00:15:49,760
Speaker 1: the right to life movement For anti abortion activists, I'm

267
00:15:49,760 --> 00:15:52,240
Speaker 1: not sure what the next target is in terms of

268
00:15:52,600 --> 00:15:56,680
Speaker 1: pulling back constitutional rights. It seems to me quite clear

269
00:15:56,720 --> 00:16:00,880
Speaker 1: that emergency contraception is initially in the cross pairs. And

270
00:16:00,920 --> 00:16:04,280
Speaker 1: what could see how the analysis that Justice Alito does

271
00:16:04,400 --> 00:16:09,840
Speaker 1: in this opinion, with relatively few modifications, could be applied

272
00:16:09,920 --> 00:16:14,560
Speaker 1: to the notion of a constitutional right to contraception. Now,

273
00:16:14,640 --> 00:16:18,640
Speaker 1: there are some folks who would say, well, yes, there

274
00:16:18,640 --> 00:16:23,560
Speaker 1: should be no constitutional rights to contraception for unmarried couples,

275
00:16:23,560 --> 00:16:28,960
Speaker 1: but married couples would be protected by the marittle privacy

276
00:16:29,040 --> 00:16:32,680
Speaker 1: that they say is deeply rooted in our history and tradition.

277
00:16:33,040 --> 00:16:35,680
Speaker 1: But the fact is that's even a talking point, even

278
00:16:35,840 --> 00:16:41,640
Speaker 1: something we're having discussions about, shows how quickly the movement

279
00:16:42,000 --> 00:16:48,520
Speaker 1: is shifting towards targeting other constitutional rights. Which constitutional rights

280
00:16:48,600 --> 00:16:51,960
Speaker 1: that are based in privacy, would Alida say, or the

281
00:16:52,000 --> 00:16:56,400
Speaker 1: Conservative Justices are deeply rooted in the constitution. The level

282
00:16:56,480 --> 00:16:59,520
Speaker 1: of generality at which we define a right matters quite

283
00:16:59,560 --> 00:17:02,800
Speaker 1: a bit. So the right to marry would seem to

284
00:17:02,880 --> 00:17:06,200
Speaker 1: be a right deeply rooted in our nation's history and tradition.

285
00:17:06,320 --> 00:17:09,800
Speaker 1: Now that right has excluded people throughout history. Right, it

286
00:17:09,880 --> 00:17:13,480
Speaker 1: excluded enslaved people. But we could say that that was

287
00:17:13,520 --> 00:17:16,480
Speaker 1: deeply rooted. Now Justice Alito, as we know from his

288
00:17:16,640 --> 00:17:20,760
Speaker 1: dissenting opinion, and o Berg if alv Hodges would say

289
00:17:20,920 --> 00:17:23,800
Speaker 1: same sex marriage is not part of that history, that

290
00:17:23,880 --> 00:17:27,680
Speaker 1: it's really man woman marriage that's part of our history,

291
00:17:28,160 --> 00:17:31,920
Speaker 1: not marriage between people of the same sex. Of course,

292
00:17:32,040 --> 00:17:34,720
Speaker 1: one could say the same thing about interracial marriage, that

293
00:17:34,840 --> 00:17:37,680
Speaker 1: from much of our history it was taboo, was not

294
00:17:37,800 --> 00:17:41,359
Speaker 1: protected by our laws or our traditions. I don't think

295
00:17:41,400 --> 00:17:44,880
Speaker 1: that any of the Conservative Justices want to go that far,

296
00:17:45,480 --> 00:17:48,359
Speaker 1: but the argument is there. Once we adopt a test

297
00:17:49,000 --> 00:17:53,320
Speaker 1: that looks at the eighteen hundreds in order to consider

298
00:17:53,359 --> 00:17:56,600
Speaker 1: what rights the Constitution should protect. That's where we are.

299
00:17:57,200 --> 00:18:00,240
Speaker 1: Justice Thomas is in an interracial marriage, so I out

300
00:18:00,280 --> 00:18:03,840
Speaker 1: that that's going to be something that's in question, But

301
00:18:04,320 --> 00:18:08,520
Speaker 1: gay marriage is something else. Both the Leado and Thomas

302
00:18:08,560 --> 00:18:12,879
Speaker 1: have questioned the constitutional right to gain marriage. Is reversing

303
00:18:12,920 --> 00:18:16,560
Speaker 1: the right to gain marriage different from reversing the right

304
00:18:16,920 --> 00:18:21,080
Speaker 1: to abortion. Because of the reliance interests of people who

305
00:18:21,400 --> 00:18:24,879
Speaker 1: are already in gay marriages. There are, you know, children

306
00:18:24,880 --> 00:18:28,879
Speaker 1: who have been adopted by gay parents. I just wonder

307
00:18:28,880 --> 00:18:33,399
Speaker 1: if that would be very difficult to unwind. So the

308
00:18:33,440 --> 00:18:36,920
Speaker 1: reliance interest between abortion and same sex marriage, I think

309
00:18:37,000 --> 00:18:41,560
Speaker 1: running exactly the opposite direction. We've had about fifty years

310
00:18:41,600 --> 00:18:44,760
Speaker 1: of Roe v. Wade. People have structured their whole lives

311
00:18:44,800 --> 00:18:48,720
Speaker 1: around this. There are multiple generations who have depended on

312
00:18:48,800 --> 00:18:52,600
Speaker 1: the existence of the abortion right. Same sex marriage as

313
00:18:52,600 --> 00:18:55,760
Speaker 1: a constitutional matter is seven years old, and I think

314
00:18:55,840 --> 00:18:59,280
Speaker 1: that many conservatives would say that the time period at

315
00:18:59,280 --> 00:19:03,920
Speaker 1: which Oberga Salvi Hodges was decided shows that the states

316
00:19:04,119 --> 00:19:07,320
Speaker 1: can make it work. Same sex marriage also has the

317
00:19:07,359 --> 00:19:09,920
Speaker 1: benefit of the full faith and Credit clause, so that

318
00:19:10,000 --> 00:19:13,440
Speaker 1: someone could go get married in Massachusetts come back to

319
00:19:13,600 --> 00:19:18,399
Speaker 1: Texas and have their marriage acknowledged by the state. So

320
00:19:18,480 --> 00:19:21,960
Speaker 1: I don't think the reliance interests are stronger. If anything,

321
00:19:22,000 --> 00:19:24,800
Speaker 1: they are weaker in the area of same sex marriage,

322
00:19:25,000 --> 00:19:27,960
Speaker 1: Which doesn't mean that they aren't essential and important and

323
00:19:28,040 --> 00:19:31,880
Speaker 1: that people haven't structured their life around same sex marriage.

324
00:19:32,359 --> 00:19:35,919
Speaker 1: But Justice Alito and his fellow travelers just gave the

325
00:19:35,920 --> 00:19:38,400
Speaker 1: back of a hand to the idea there was any

326
00:19:38,440 --> 00:19:44,480
Speaker 1: reliance interests from five decades of the abortion right. President Biden,

327
00:19:45,240 --> 00:19:50,760
Speaker 1: after this draft was revealed, named lgbt Q rights as

328
00:19:50,920 --> 00:19:55,840
Speaker 1: specifically at risk. What impact could a reversal of ROW

329
00:19:56,040 --> 00:20:02,640
Speaker 1: have for the transgender community. Well, Justice Alito's draft opinion

330
00:20:03,200 --> 00:20:09,000
Speaker 1: really questions whether the Constitution protects a right to privacy

331
00:20:09,200 --> 00:20:13,040
Speaker 1: in the fullteenth Amendment right with part of the basis

332
00:20:13,119 --> 00:20:16,119
Speaker 1: for the abortion right was the notion that privacy was

333
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:20,800
Speaker 1: protected through the fourteenth Amendment and privacy rights are essential

334
00:20:20,920 --> 00:20:25,080
Speaker 1: for sexual autonomy. We could look back to Laurence by Texas,

335
00:20:25,240 --> 00:20:28,840
Speaker 1: where the Supreme Court, on both equal protection and substantive

336
00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:33,040
Speaker 1: due process grounds granted some measure of right to consensual

337
00:20:33,119 --> 00:20:37,120
Speaker 1: sexual intimacy. That matters quite a great deal for sexual

338
00:20:37,240 --> 00:20:41,960
Speaker 1: rights and rights with LGBTQ people. Rights to parent children

339
00:20:42,000 --> 00:20:45,719
Speaker 1: could become very fraught here. I think all the justices

340
00:20:45,800 --> 00:20:48,880
Speaker 1: would say that right to parents is part of our

341
00:20:48,960 --> 00:20:51,960
Speaker 1: deeply rooted history and tradition. But we're seeing at the

342
00:20:52,000 --> 00:20:56,199
Speaker 1: moment a concerted attack on the right of parents to

343
00:20:56,800 --> 00:21:02,000
Speaker 1: raise transgender kids, in attack on their decision making about

344
00:21:02,040 --> 00:21:07,120
Speaker 1: medical care and treatment for those particular children. And so

345
00:21:07,160 --> 00:21:10,600
Speaker 1: I think we will see some cases where states may

346
00:21:10,720 --> 00:21:15,160
Speaker 1: respond that the rights of parents just doesn't apply here

347
00:21:15,280 --> 00:21:19,760
Speaker 1: where we're talking about decisions about transgender kids. Looking at

348
00:21:19,880 --> 00:21:23,840
Speaker 1: what happened on Wednesday, where the Democrats couldn't even get

349
00:21:23,880 --> 00:21:28,440
Speaker 1: all their own members to vote for a bill protecting

350
00:21:28,440 --> 00:21:32,800
Speaker 1: abortion rights, what's the next step? What can be done?

351
00:21:33,440 --> 00:21:39,399
Speaker 1: Could passing the Equal Rights Amendment affect abortion rights? You know,

352
00:21:39,840 --> 00:21:43,800
Speaker 1: there's some irony here in that Equal Rights Amendment generated

353
00:21:43,840 --> 00:21:47,760
Speaker 1: lots of opposition, partly based on the bathroom issue um

354
00:21:47,840 --> 00:21:51,480
Speaker 1: and based on draft the draft and then abortion that

355
00:21:51,520 --> 00:21:54,919
Speaker 1: it would protect abortion. But now we've had decades of

356
00:21:55,119 --> 00:21:59,840
Speaker 1: court saying that reproductive healthcare has nothing to do with

357
00:22:00,320 --> 00:22:04,600
Speaker 1: sex equality, that pregnancy has nothing to do with sex equality.

358
00:22:05,000 --> 00:22:07,720
Speaker 1: And we saw Justice Alito do that in the draft opinion.

359
00:22:08,119 --> 00:22:10,280
Speaker 1: So it almost seems like the Equal Rights Amendment would

360
00:22:10,280 --> 00:22:13,760
Speaker 1: be much less likely to affect access to reproductive healthcare

361
00:22:14,080 --> 00:22:17,440
Speaker 1: than maybe we thought it would back when it was proposed.

362
00:22:18,000 --> 00:22:21,080
Speaker 1: What are some steps that the federal government could take

363
00:22:21,800 --> 00:22:24,560
Speaker 1: right away. The first thing the federal government could and

364
00:22:24,800 --> 00:22:28,720
Speaker 1: should and should have done is to more comprehensibly enforce

365
00:22:28,800 --> 00:22:32,959
Speaker 1: the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor act Um. We know

366
00:22:33,200 --> 00:22:35,879
Speaker 1: that in particular and read states, but in states across

367
00:22:35,920 --> 00:22:38,800
Speaker 1: the country, that there are many hospitals that when someone

368
00:22:38,880 --> 00:22:42,560
Speaker 1: comes to the hospital miscaring, they do not treat them

369
00:22:42,560 --> 00:22:46,040
Speaker 1: according to the standard of care, and they violate federal

370
00:22:46,119 --> 00:22:49,600
Speaker 1: law requiring emergency treatment of people and labor according to

371
00:22:49,600 --> 00:22:52,600
Speaker 1: the standard of care. And those laws are enforceable by

372
00:22:52,600 --> 00:22:55,320
Speaker 1: the federal government and should be enforced. We have reports

373
00:22:55,400 --> 00:22:58,639
Speaker 1: from lots of states, but apparently some widespread practice in

374
00:22:58,680 --> 00:23:03,640
Speaker 1: places like al Lama, where doctors are concerned about legal

375
00:23:03,680 --> 00:23:06,920
Speaker 1: liability under the state law, but federal law pre empt

376
00:23:07,000 --> 00:23:09,959
Speaker 1: state law, and the federal government should be enforcing in Tala.

377
00:23:10,400 --> 00:23:12,960
Speaker 1: The second thing the government could do is act through

378
00:23:13,000 --> 00:23:16,640
Speaker 1: the Food and Drug Administration, so the federal government could

379
00:23:16,680 --> 00:23:20,000
Speaker 1: use the Food and Drug Administration UM to more clearly

380
00:23:20,080 --> 00:23:23,200
Speaker 1: pre empt state laws that attempt to interfere with access

381
00:23:23,280 --> 00:23:27,440
Speaker 1: to medication abortion. And this could have some major effect

382
00:23:27,640 --> 00:23:31,800
Speaker 1: because states are going to be focused I think going forward,

383
00:23:32,320 --> 00:23:35,480
Speaker 1: UM quite a bit on access to medication abortion and

384
00:23:35,560 --> 00:23:41,600
Speaker 1: self managed abortion care. Is that something that's difficult to control,

385
00:23:41,880 --> 00:23:46,600
Speaker 1: difficult for states who outlaw abortion to control, you know,

386
00:23:46,680 --> 00:23:50,359
Speaker 1: the sending of pills right, States will have a much

387
00:23:50,440 --> 00:23:55,160
Speaker 1: harder time targeting medication abortion than they have targeting abortion

388
00:23:55,320 --> 00:24:00,160
Speaker 1: providers in clinics. And the states don't have control over

389
00:24:00,200 --> 00:24:02,960
Speaker 1: the mail. That's the province of the federal government. But

390
00:24:03,720 --> 00:24:06,119
Speaker 1: I think we should all recall that we're essentially carrying

391
00:24:06,119 --> 00:24:09,639
Speaker 1: around surveillance devices in our hands. And I think we

392
00:24:09,680 --> 00:24:14,080
Speaker 1: will see lots of efforts made to target medication abortion

393
00:24:14,119 --> 00:24:17,159
Speaker 1: and cut off the flow. And states, um, you know,

394
00:24:17,240 --> 00:24:19,520
Speaker 1: aren't going to be able to prosecute everyone. They're not

395
00:24:19,560 --> 00:24:21,880
Speaker 1: going to be able to stop everyone from getting access

396
00:24:21,920 --> 00:24:24,880
Speaker 1: to medication abortion. There will be lots of medication abortion,

397
00:24:25,320 --> 00:24:28,040
Speaker 1: but I suspect states will target their energy on people

398
00:24:28,240 --> 00:24:32,200
Speaker 1: they know our movement actors and may be helping supply

399
00:24:32,359 --> 00:24:36,239
Speaker 1: medication abortion to people in states that prohibit it. I

400
00:24:36,400 --> 00:24:40,960
Speaker 1: just want to get your reaction to what Janet Yellen testified,

401
00:24:41,520 --> 00:24:43,720
Speaker 1: and she said, I believe that eliminating the right of

402
00:24:43,720 --> 00:24:46,879
Speaker 1: women to make decisions about when and whether to have

403
00:24:47,040 --> 00:24:50,760
Speaker 1: children would have a very damaging effect on the economy

404
00:24:50,840 --> 00:24:54,000
Speaker 1: and would set women back decades. Do you think this

405
00:24:54,080 --> 00:24:58,240
Speaker 1: would set women back decades? We know what happens when

406
00:24:58,880 --> 00:25:03,119
Speaker 1: women don't have acts US too good reproductive healthcare. They

407
00:25:03,240 --> 00:25:06,640
Speaker 1: end up getting pregnant when they're teenagers. They end up

408
00:25:06,920 --> 00:25:10,760
Speaker 1: marrying partners who they shouldn't marry, or stay with partners

409
00:25:10,760 --> 00:25:14,680
Speaker 1: they shouldn't. Mary end up trapped in situations that they

410
00:25:14,680 --> 00:25:18,640
Speaker 1: can't get out of, and they don't have the time

411
00:25:19,040 --> 00:25:22,480
Speaker 1: or recourse is to be able to devote to education

412
00:25:22,720 --> 00:25:25,920
Speaker 1: and employment that they otherwise hat would have if they

413
00:25:25,920 --> 00:25:29,680
Speaker 1: could make the decisions about when and how to form

414
00:25:29,720 --> 00:25:33,960
Speaker 1: their families. Thanks Liz. That's Professor Elizabeth Sepper of the

415
00:25:34,080 --> 00:25:37,439
Speaker 1: University of Texas Law School, And that's it for this

416
00:25:37,560 --> 00:25:40,280
Speaker 1: edition of the Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always

417
00:25:40,320 --> 00:25:43,240
Speaker 1: get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast.

418
00:25:43,520 --> 00:25:46,520
Speaker 1: You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at

419
00:25:46,720 --> 00:25:51,760
Speaker 1: www dot Bloomberg dot com. Slash podcast Slash Law, and

420
00:25:51,800 --> 00:25:54,520
Speaker 1: remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every week

421
00:25:54,640 --> 00:25:57,760
Speaker 1: night at ten b m Wall Street Time. I'm June

422
00:25:57,760 --> 00:25:59,879
Speaker 1: Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg