![](https://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.6976871.1721873052!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_800/image.jpg)
DEVELOPING Jasper updates: Wildfire reaches Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge
One of two wildfires threatening Jasper National Park has reached the townsite.
They are the most fiercely polarizing issues in American life: abortion and guns. And two momentous decisions by the Supreme Court in two days have done anything but resolve them, firing up debate about whether the court's Conservative justices are being faithful and consistent to history and the Constitution – or citing them to justify political preferences.
To some critics, the rulings represent an obvious, deeply damaging contradiction. How can the court justify restricting the ability of states to regulate guns while expanding the right of states to regulate abortion?
"The hypocrisy is raging, but the harm is endless," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday after the court released its decision on abortion.
To supporters, the court's conservatives are staying true to the country's founding principles and undoing errors of the past.
The court corrected a historic wrong when it voided a right to abortion that has stood for nearly 50 years, former Vice President Mike Pence said Friday. On Twitter, he said the decision returned to Americans the power to "govern themselves at the state level in a manner consistent with their values and aspirations."
Opponents of Roe v. Wade, the controversial 1973 ruling that upheld the right to abortion, say the Supreme Court back then did just what some accuse the majority justices of doing now, adapting and twisting legal arguments to fit political positions.
Members of the court's current Conservative majority, laying out their thinking in this week's decisions, have been quite consistent, sticking to the words of the country's founders and the precedents of history that reach back even further, those supporters say.
In both decisions, the majority makes the case that if a right is spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, the bar for any government regulation of that right is extremely high. But if a right is not explicit, state and federal governments have greater leeway to impose regulations.
To those who study the court, though, the reality is more complicated.
A number agree that, for all the controversy of the rulings, the majority justices at least followed a consistent legal theory in issuing the decisions on abortion and guns.
"I understand how it might look hypocritical, but from the perspective of the Conservative majority on the court, it's a consistent approach to both cases," said Richard Albert, law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. "I'm not saying it's correct, by the way, but from their perspective it is completely consistent and coherent."
Consistency, though, cannot mask the fact that there has been a seismic shift on the court since President Donald Trump appointed three conservatives. And that is likely to further muddy public perceptions of an institution that prefers to see itself as being above politics, court watchers say.
Both decisions "come from the same court whose legitimacy is plummeting," said Laurence Tribe, a leading scholar of Constitutional law and emeritus professor at the Harvard Law School.
The court majority's decisions on gun rights and the ruling a day later on abortion both rely on a philosophy of constitutional interpretation called "originalism." To assess what rights the Constitution confers, originalists hone in on what the texts meant when they were written.
Opinions by originalists are often laden with detailed surveys of history, as both these rulings are.
The bulk of Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion on gun rights is devoted to history and what it says about the Founders' intentions when they crafted the Second Amendment and when lawmakers crafted the 14th Amendment on due process in the 1860s. Thomas broached a long list of historical figures, including the English King Henry VIII, who the ruling says worried that the advent of handguns threatened his subjects' proficiency with the longbow.
The abortion ruling authored by Justice Samuel Alito similarly delves deep into the past, concluding that there was nothing in the historical record supporting a constitutional right to obtain an abortion.
"Not only was there no support for such a constitutional right until shortly before Roe, but abortion had long been a crime in every single state," Alito wrote.
This week's two decisions are more legally consistent than critics suggest, said Jonathan Entin, a law professor emeritus at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.
"We can debate about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but the Second Amendment does explicitly talk about the right to keep and bear arms, whereas the right to abortion access is not explicitly in the Constitution," he said. "If that's where you are going to go, then maybe these decisions are not in such tension after all."
Not all observers agree.
"I think there is a double standard going on here," said Barry McDonald, a professor of law at Pepperdine University, reviewing the justices' arguments that both decisions are grounded in a strict reading of the law and of history. That logic is shaky, he said, given the conclusion by many legal historians that the right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights is, in fact, much narrower than the court majority insists.
Most ordinary Americans, though, will be unfamiliar with such intricate legal theory. Instead, many will size up the court's actions based on their perceptions of the justices' motives and the personal implications of the decisions, experts said.
Many are likely to view the rulings as the direct result of Trump's appointments and the justices' determination to carry out his agenda, making the court "more of an institution of politics than it is of law," McDonald said.
Tribe said the court's majority has embraced an imaginary past and its claims that is only upholding the law are false. The majority justices can assert that they have been legally consistent. But taken together, he said, the decisions on guns and abortion create a whiplash effect from a court that claims to be protecting individual rights, then effectively limited many Americans' control over their own bodies.
"I think the decisions point in radically different directions," Tribe said, "but the one thing they have in common is they are decided by a new, emboldened majority that knows no limits on its own power and is perfectly willing to toss over precedent in the name of a version of originalism that really doesn't hold together."
-------
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, CTVNews.ca wants to hear from Canadians who have had an abortion.
Did you struggle to access abortion services or information in Canada? Was it difficult to secure an appointment?
Tell us your story by emailing dotcom@bellmedia.ca, and include your name and location. Your comments may be used in a CTVNews.ca story.
One of two wildfires threatening Jasper National Park has reached the townsite.
Alberta has called in the Canadian Armed Forces to help assist with the worsening wildfire situation in the province.
U.S. President Joe Biden on Wednesday delivered a solemn call to voters to defend the country's democracy as he laid out in an Oval Office address his decision to drop his bid for reelection and throw his support behind Vice President Kamala Harris.
Staff at a Barrie child care centre say they are frustrated by what they call a local MPP's inadequate response after a car crashed through a window in one of the toddler rooms.
The North American Aerospace Defence Command (Norad) intercepted two Russian and two Chinese bombers flying near Alaska Wednesday in what appears to be the first time the two countries have been intercepted while operating together.
An analyst and an assistant coach with Canada Soccer are being removed from the Canadian Olympic Team and 'sent home immediately,' according to the Canadian Olympic Committee.
After a handful of Australian water polo players tested positive for COVID-19 this week, questions have emerged around how the spread of the disease will be mitigated at the Summer Olympic Games in Paris.
A B.C. man who was hired to help a non-profit build a food hub but instead spent the money on personal expenses – including travel, restaurants, booze and cannabis – has been ordered to pay more than $120,000 in damages.
Two people are dead and two others suffered serious injuries following a shooting that police have described as a 'gun battle' outside a plaza in Scarborough, Ont. early Wednesday morning.
A local First Nations elder and veteran is helping to bring the Ojibwe language to a well-known film for the first time.
A cat who fled her Montreal home nearly a decade ago has been reunited with her family after being found in Ottawa.
A woman in Waterloo, Ont. is out thousands of dollars for a car crash she wasn’t involved in.
A swarm of bees living in a lamppost in Winnipeg’s Sage Creek neighbourhood has found a new home for its hive.
Around 100 acres of Manitoba Crown Land near the Saskatchewan border is being returned to the Métis community.
Nova Scotia is suspending the licensed Cape Breton moose hunt for three years due to what the province is calling a “significant drop” in the population.
A well-known childhood prank known as 'nicky nicky nine doors,' or 'ding dong ditch,' has escalated into a more serious game that could lead to charges for some Surrey, B.C. teens.
It's been more than a month since their good friend was seriously hurt in an accident and two teens from Riverview, N.B., are still having a hard time dealing with it.
Halifax bridges have collected thousands of coins from around the world.