Is Roberts Reluctant to Overturn Precedent?

In a recent New Yorker profile, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) takes heart in the responses that Supreme Court nominee John Roberts gave when asked about overturning Court precedent:

Roberts, in Reid’s view, left no doubt that he would be very reluctant to overturn precedents. To do so, Roberts had said, the Court would first have to consider a series of objective criteria, two of which stood out: whether a precedent fostered stability in the nation; and the extent to which society had come to rely on an earlier ruling, even a dubious one.

Unfortunately, Roberts’ responses are now being heralded as an indication of where he stands on Roe v Wade, the landmark Supreme Court case that ensured a woman’s right to privacy. However, according to conservatives, Roe v Wade actually meets the two criteria that jumped out at Reid:

Did the precedent foster stability in the nation?

Not in the viewpoint of conservatives. In fact, just a few months ago NYT columnist David Brooks declared, “Justice Harry Blackmun did more inadvertent damage to our democracy than any other 20th-century American. When he and his Supreme Court colleagues issued the Roe v. Wade decision, they set off a cycle of political viciousness and counter-viciousness that has poisoned public life ever since ”

Has society come to rely on the earlier ruling?

Rather than rely on the ruling, conservatives have been actively working to undermine it. In an address to the annual meeting of the Conservative Caucus Foundation, a conservative lawyer argued that, “In many states, statutes prohibiting abortion remain unrepealed and available to local prosecutors to bring criminal actions against abortion providers Even in states where the statutes have been changed to conform to the Roe formula, a prosecutor may still have ample authority under the state’s law and constitution to bring criminal actions against abortion promoters and providers.” He concluded by asserting that, “Rightfully understood, [the local prosecutor's] duty is to interpose their office between Roe v. Wade, a constitutionally erroneous opinion, and the people whose rights they are duty bound to protect.”