44 United States The Economist December 4th 2021
changed. Nothing less than overruling Roe
and Caseywould do.
Several justices have been open about
their scepticism of Roe. Justice Clarence
Thomas has declared it “grievously wrong”.
In the 1980s, before he wore a judicial robe,
Samuel Alito wrote that “the Constitution
does not protect a right to an abortion.” So
there was no doubt that Mississippi had at
least a somewhat receptive audience for its
proposition. But this week only one mem
ber of the court’s sixjustice conservative
bloc—Chief Justice John Roberts—seemed
interested in finding a way to uphold Mis
sissippi’s law without throwing Roeout.
In his questioning of the lawyers argu
ing against Mississippi’s law, Julie Rikel
man of the Centre for Reproductive Rights
and Elizabeth Prelogar, solicitorgeneral of
the United States, Chief Justice Roberts
suggested that the viability line may not be
essential to Roeor Casey. The right to abor
tion, he implied, could endure without it.
Neither lawyer accepted this. The lawyer
for Mississippi, Scott Stewart, was of no
help to the chief, either. The only means of
getting rid of a number of the problems
that come with a middle way, he said, is to
“overrule full scale”.
Most lawyers and justices alike seemed
resigned to this allornothing proposi
tion. But they struck different tones. Jus
tice Brett Kavanaugh recited a string of cas
es in which the court overruled precedent.
Since the constitution is “neither prolife
nor prochoice”, abortion law should be re
turned to the states or perhaps Congress to
resolve. There may be “different answers in
Mississippi and New York”, but that’s how
democracy works. Ms Prelogar’s reply: no,
“this is a fundamental right of women, and
the nature of fundamental rights is that it’s
not left up to state legislatures to decide
whether to honour them or not.”Justice Barrett asked both Ms Rikelman
and Ms Prelogar about “safehaven laws”—
statutes in most states that allow women
to drop off unwanted babies without being
charged with child abandonment. Don’t
these laws take pressure off women who
worry that having a child will disrupt their
lives or careers? There may still be a burden
on “bodily autonomy” that comes with a
state requirement to bring a fetus to term,
she acknowledged, but this is also true “in
other contexts, like vaccines”.
The impact of curtailing or renouncing
Roeon American women, onequarter of
whom get an abortion in their lifetime, re
ceived scarce attention from the conserva
tive justices. The lawyers did press the
matter. Ms Rikelman said Mississippi’s law
“would particularly hurt women with a
major health or life change during the
course of a pregnancy, poor women, who
are twice as likely to be delayed in access
ing care, and young people”. Justices Elena
Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor amplified
some of these points. Abortion “is part of
the fabric of women’s existence in this
country”, Justice Kagan said.
The justices were more keen to assess
what damage might come to the court were
it to walk away from Roe when it delivers
its verdict next summer. Justice Stephen
Breyer worried that observers would say,
“you’re just political” if the court were to
overrule Roe. Before taking such a step, he
added, “you better be damn sure” the typi
cal standards for overruling a decision “are
really there in spades, double, triple, qua
druple”. Justice Sotomayor, in what sound
ed like a cri de coeur rather than an attempt
to win over justices to her right, asked:
“Will this institution survive the stench
that this createsinthepublic perception
that the constitutionand its reading are
just political acts?” nThe other oral argumentsNavyshipyardsAll at sea
W
ind whipsthe unfinished flight deck
of the ussJohn F. Kennedy, scaffold
ing swaying as workers scramble to their
stations. Derek Murphy, the ship’s con
struction manager at Newport News Ship
yard, gazes proudly at the electromagnetic
aircraftcatapult running along the ship’s
length, one of 23 new technologies on
board. “At launch, she’ll be the most power
ful warship in the world,” he says.
The vessel, the second aircraftcarrier
in a new class named after President Ger
ald Ford, is due to be completed in 2024,
after years of delays and at a cost of $11.9bn.
The Kennedyis hardly the only concern for
HuntingtonIngalls Industries, the ship
yard’s operator. Across 550 packed acres,
engineers race to assemble nuclearpo
wered carriers and submarines. In Wash
ington, meanwhile, nervous planners
hope that the shipyard will find room to
build more.
In response to the rise of a new super
power rival, America’s shipyards are strug
gling to support an expanding navy. They
are still suffering from the hangover of the
“peace dividend” that followed the col
lapse of the Soviet Union, when plans for
ships were scuttled, facilities were closed
and skilled workers laid off. From a peak of
594 in 1987, America’s navy will have 306
ships by the end of this year; the Depart
ment of Defence estimates that China’s has
355 (increasingly capable) vessels. Con
gress is eager to allocate more funds for the
navy, which aims to build a modern fleet of
355 ships by 2035. The shipyards will need
help to make this a reality.
They are emerging from a long decline.
In 1993, at a gathering known in defenceN EWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA
America wants a stronger navy to face
China. Are its shipyards up to the task?