Stewart confirms that Mississippi (unlike some of the amicus briefs) is not asking for the Court to rule that the Constitution prohibits abortion.
Kavanaugh clarifies that Stewart's basic argument is that the constitution is silent and therefore neutral on abortion. It is a matter for the states.
You will note the lack of questions indicating there is any actual constitutional basis for the holdings of Roe and Casey, or that Roe's constitutional reasoning was correct or even respectable.
Kavanaugh: You're not arguing that Court has authority itself to prohibit abortion?
Stewart: Right.
Kagan asks about middle-ground options, how they would operate.
Stewart: That's why we prefer overruling.
Ed – yes, he is not sending it back. Typo mine. Fixed now. This is live!
Roberts goes into “Bueller, Bueller…” mode asking by name each Justice if they have more questions. Not something one usually heard in SCOTUS arguments before the Zoom era, which forced the Justices into a little delay in interruptions.
Kagan asking Stewart to explain intermediary positions the Court might take in the future on abortion regulations if it throws out its previous standards. I think the simplest answer is that the Court shouldn’t be in the business of deciding about abortion regulations at all.
Chief on stare decisis: How evaluate whether precedent was wrongly decided? Based on other precedents at the time?
And, Dan, Erie v. Tompkins was much, much worse on the merits than a reversal of Roe would be. But maybe I'm wandering too far afield.