After talking to Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Senator Susan Collins — a Republican from Maine who believes the Supreme Court should keep legislatures from protecting unborn children — had this to say: “We talked about whether he considered Roe to be settled law. He said that he agreed with what Justice Roberts said at his nomination hearing in which he said it was settled law.”

Chief Justice Roberts said that Roe was “settled as a precedent of the Court,” a formulation that appears to render “settled” a nullity — to be equivalent, that is, to saying that “Roe is a precedent of the Court” or “it is settled that Roe is a precedent of the Court.” Recognizing that Roe is a precedent, and even affirming that the Court should have a presumption against overruling precedents, does not preclude overruling or narrowing Roe. So while Collins is suggesting that she was pleased by what Kavanaugh had to say, many supporters of Roe are less satisfied.

But it’s not clear what more those supporters can reasonably ask Kavanaugh to say, given the conventions that modern Supreme Court nominees of both parties have long followed.