In other words, the case he relies on as a precedent that he says can’t be broken was wrongly decided.
The abandonment of logic in dealing with something as serious as law is disconcerting.
In this case, the abortion providers aren’t hurt because there is no constitutional right to perform an abortion and Louisiana requires admitting privileges for many other medical procedures (Lasik eye surgery, etc.) in case something goes wrong.
Admitting privileges are fundamentally a patient protection mechanism. The initial vetting, renewal, and ongoing enforcement of medical standards by peers ensures that physicans have the qualificaitons that they claim to have and that minimum levels of professional standards are upheld. The fact, enshirined in law, that elective abortion providers should somehow be exempted from this basic level of patient protection represents a threat to patient safety.
We said Roe v. Wade was safe during the confirmation fight over Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and many on the left and right sneered. Sorry, folks, were you watching the Chief? These columns going back decades have supported abortion rights, within boundaries, but it is a political question to be decided democratically. Roe has poisoned so much of American political life, and politicized the judiciary in the process, by removing abortion from legislative debate.
There is no recourse to these rulings except a future ruling by the same Court. This is not a healthy reality within a democracy and further illustrates the importance of an independent judiciary should rule narrowly on issues that come before the court.
Russo continues a dismaying string of rulings by the Chief Justice—less due to their result than their reasoning. He seems to think he has to protect the Court from Democratic threats to undermine its legitimacy. But in the process he is resorting to logic that looks designed to achieve political results.
The distorted logic is evident even to those unschooled in matters of law. That’s the real problem.