The future of Roe v. Wade before a Supreme Court majority not reflective of the popular will.

On June 29, 1992, the Supreme Court decided Planned Parenthood v. Casey, upholding its ruling 20 years earlier in Roe v. Wade. Both decisions rested on the proposition that there is a constitutional right to privacy. Yesterday,the Court agreed to hear a case that coukd lead to a reversal of those precedents. In the nearly 30 years since Casey was decided polling has shown consistently that a majority of Americans believe that those two cases were correctly decided. In the nearly 30 years since, the issue of reproductive rights has increasingly split along political party lines, Democrats largely in favor, Republicans largely against. In the nearly 30 years since, we have had eight Presidential elections. The Democrat has won the popular vote in seven of those eight elections. In the nearly 30 years since, eight of the nine justices of the Supreme Court have replaced retired or deceased justices: only Justice Thomas was on the Court when Casey was decided, and he dissented. Three of the eight were appointed by Democrats, five by Republicans. In each instance, the question of Roe and Casey loomed over the confirmation proceedings. Over a century ago, the satirist Finley Peter Dunne's fictional bartender Mr. Dooley observed that the Supreme Court ultimately “followed the illiction [sic] returns.” While this was intended as a cynical comment, it also reflected the concept that, over time, the Supreme Court was not as anti-democratic as it could, in the abstract, be. The relationship of the Court to the elected branches of government was, in theory, tempered by the fact that its members were nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. For many decades, most Americans have been basically satisfied with Roe and Casey, and this approval has been reflected in the popular vote for President. But now we are seeing that the Constitutional defect of the malapportioned Electoral College and Senate is catching up with us.