Susan Collins Will Vote to Kill Abortion Rights

Tom Williams/Congressional Quarterly/Newscom via ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Is Roe v. Wade effectively dead once President Trump nominates a conservative new justice to replace Anthony Kennedy? Maybe not! Republicans only have 51 votes in the Senate, and Susan Collins of Maine told Jake Tapper yesterday that she won’t support anyone who would overturn Roe:

I would not support a nominee who demonstrated hostility to Roe v. Wade, because that would mean to me that their judicial philosophy did not include a respect for established decisions, established law.

So, um, that’s great. But what about Neil Gorsuch? You voted for him.

I had a very long discussion with Justice Gorsuch in my office, and he pointed out to me that he is a co-author of a whole book on precedent. So, someone who devotes that much time to writing a book on precedent, I think, understands how important a principle that is in our judicial system.

So Roe is doomed. We already knew that, so this is hardly a big bombshell at this point. But you still have to wonder: is Susan Collins the most gullible person on the planet? It’s one thing to have a sunny, trusting disposition, but does she seriously think that Gorsuch wouldn’t vote to overturn Roe in a heartbeat? Hell, the guy joined the majority just last week in a ruling about public union agency fees that stated in its second paragraph, “Abood was poorly reasoned….Developments since Abood was handed down have shed new light on the issue of agency fees….Abood is therefore overruled.” For the record, Abood was decided in 1977. Unless Gorsuch believes that a 45-year-old precedent is somehow more sacred than a 41-year-old precedent, I think it’s safe to say that he might find that Roe was poorly reasoned too, and developments since it was handed down have shed new light on the issue of abortion.

So I’m sticking with my prediction that Roe is dead. The only real question is how long the Supreme Court waits so the new guy can pretend that things have changed since he promised Collins with all his heart that he has tremendous respect for precedent.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend