After keeping silent for most of the week following the Supreme Court’s pro-abortion ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, Donald Trump finally weighed in on the case yesterday in a radio interview, arguing that the outcome would have been different if he were president:
“Now if we had Scalia … or if Scalia was replaced by me, you wouldn’t have had that. Okay? It would’ve been the opposite,” Trump told radio host Mike Gallagher during an interview, referring to late Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February.
Trump also said that the decision was the first of many liberal victories to come if his likely Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, wins the presidency in November. On the campaign trail, Trump has regularly talked about Supreme Court appointments to elevate the stakes of the race.
“You know, there’s your first example right there …that’s going to be the first of many. And if she gets in, if she gets in, you won’t even have to question. You wouldn’t even have to bother going to court. You’re going to know the answers,” he said.
For conservatives deeply concerned about the normally outspoken Trump’s lack of comment on the issue, these remarks were likely met with at least a partial sigh of relief. But is this a case of better late than never? Or did his response come too little too late?
The episode reinforced doubts among prominent conservatives over whether Trump is sufficiently dedicated to ensuring a right-leaning Supreme Court.