Politics & Policy

The Corner

Maryanne Trump Barry vs. Samuel Alito on Abortion

From last night’s debate:

TRUMP: Now, Ted’s been very critical — I have a sister who’s a brilliant . . . 

HEWITT: Mr. Cruz, will you make a deal about religious liberty?

TRUMP: . . . excuse me. She’s a brilliant judge. He’s been criticizing — he’s been criticizing my sister for signing a certain bill. You know who else signed that bill? Justice Samuel Alito, a very conservative member of the Supreme Court, with my sister, signed that bill.

So I think that maybe we should get a little bit of an apology from Ted. What do you think?

I think Trump doesn’t know what he’s talking about, starting with the fact that judicial opinions and bills are not the same thing.

What Cruz has mentioned in the past is Judge Maryanne Trump Barry’s opinion in a 2000 case concerning a New Jersey law banning partial-birth abortion. The Supreme Court had already struck down a similar law before that opinion was issued. Judge Barry could have simply ruled that the Supreme Court had spoken and that lower-court judges were bound by its ruling to strike down the New Jersey law too. Instead, Judge Barry wrote an expansive opinion attacking and sneering at the law, and laying out an argument that would logically justify a constitutional right to infanticide.

An important part of the rationale for a ban on partial-birth abortion was that it involved a procedure that Roe v. Wade and successor cases had not clearly declared a constitutional right before 2000. Under the Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence, the right to life of a developing human being depended on whether it was inside or outside the womb — and not, for example, on its stage of development. Inside the womb, the child was a fetus with no rights, and outside the child was an infant with rights. Pro-lifers wanted to mark an outer limit to this abortion regime by making it illegal to kill a human being who was partway out of the womb.

Judge Barry said that this was absurd and irrational. It makes no difference where the “fetus” is when it “expires,” as she put it, during an abortion. But if that’s right, then (as pro-lifers have pointed out before) it can’t make a difference if the child is fully outside the womb either. And she’s right, of course, that the location-based rule of Roe makes no sense. That’s where the irrationality lies. But she would resolve its contradictions by beginning to rationalize a constitutional right to commit and procure infanticide.

Justice Alito, then Barry’s colleague on the appeals court, did not join Barry’s opinion, which he called “unnecessary” and “obsolete,” instead just ruling that the Supreme Court’s decision on partial-birth abortion governed the lower courts.

Eventually Congress moved to make clear that it is illegal to kill children who are born alive during attempted abortions. That law was in part motivated by Judge Barry’s opinion.

It’s one thing to say we shouldn’t hold this judicial opinion against Trump because he’s just praising his sister. (Even then, one might wish he would suggest that he had a different view.) But Justice Alito didn’t join that opinion and was right not to join it, and Trump is mistaken in suggesting otherwise.

(disclosure)

Ramesh Ponnuru — Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor for National Review, a columnist for Bloomberg View, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and a senior fellow at the National Review Institute.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More