Roe v. Wade Is Not a ‘Super Precedent’ that Can’t Be Overturned, Amy Coney Barrett Says

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Tuesday said the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide is not a “super precedent” of the court and also not “well-settled” like Brown v. Board of Education.

Barrett made the comments to Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) on the second day of questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering her nomination to replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Klobuchar asked Barrett if Brown v. Board of Education – the 1954 case that ruled school segregation was unconstitutional – was precedent that “could be overruled.” Klobuchar was referencing a 2013 article by Barrett in the Texas Law Review that distinguished between “precedent” and “super precedent.”

Barrett called Brown “super precedent.”

“People consider it to be on that very small list of things that are so widely established and agreed upon by everyone,” Barrett answered. “Calls for its overruling simply don’t exist.”

Klobuchar then asked her if Roe v. Wade, which was handed down in 1973, is super precedent. Barrett referenced her 2013 article, saying only about six Supreme Court cases can be called super precedent. Roe is not in that group, she said.

“People use super precedent differently. The way that it’s used in the scholarship and the way that I was using it in the article that you’re reading…