Democratic communications consultant Francis Wilkinson has a facile op-ed in the NYTimes arguing that Republican appointees to the Supreme Court vote to uphold Roe because Republican presidents make sure to appoint justices who will do that. There are a lot of problems with the op-ed, but one obvious one is: How does Wilkinson explain the nominations of Scalia, Bork, and Thomas? Remember, Bush and Reagan were supposedly trying to keep Roe around. Are we to believe that Reagan knew and wanted Bork to be rejected, and that Bush figured that the Thomas appointment wouldn’t create an anti-Roe majority? Are we to believe, for that matter, that Reagan told Kennedy to vote to uphold abortion restrictions in Webster and then flip three years later?