Even conservative justices have a right to privacy

“The home is different,” Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote in 1988, upholding the constitutionality of a Wisconsin suburb’s ordinance prohibiting “targeted picketing” outside residents’ homes. “A special benefit of the privacy all citizens enjoy within their own walls, which the State may legislate to protect, is an ability to avoid intrusions.”

count me with Curley — and O’Connor — over Elrich. The pickets at justices’ homes — they’ve primarily targeted Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh — are beyond the pale.

More than three decades later, with another question of residential picketing in front of the court but on a more personal basis, there is a certain irony to the factual setting of O’Connor’s opinion.

Then, the justices were grappling with the question of protesters gathering outside the home of a doctor who performed abortions — carrying signs, shouting slogans and warning children to stay away from the “baby killer.”

Now, the tables have turned. The picketers are protesting the court’s decision to eliminate constitutional protection for abortion. And their intended targets are the homes of the justices themselves, on the leafy streets of Chevy Chase, Md., and in the suburbs of Virginia.

Earlier this month, Supreme Court Marshal Gail A. Curley wrote to the states’ governors and local executives asking that they enforce existing prohibitions against residential picketing.

… count me with Curley — and O’Connor — over Elrich. The pickets at justices’ homes — they’ve primarily targeted Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh — are beyond the pale.

More From The Washington Post (subscription required):