The abortion judge and her million dollar deal

Many years ago, the Rowohlt publishing house wanted to publish a book by the philosophy professor Peter Singer. Singer argued in that book that the Judeo-Christian quirk of allowing all children to live—even the deformed ones—was wrong and that it would be better if the disabled were killed in the womb. Many disabled people didn't find that particularly funny; they appealed to the Rowohlt publishing house not to publish this book. The word "cancel culture" didn't exist yet, which is why some observers spoke outraged at the time about censorship. Peter Singer was stylized as a victim: one will still be allowed to say anything!

Of course that was pure nonsense. While there is a right to freedom of expression, there is no right to have it printed by a particular publisher. Manuscript rejection is a tried and tested practice hundreds of times a week; one could even say that a publisher defines itself more by what it does not publish than by what it prints. If there were no rejections, you could abolish all editing and have all books self-published from now on.

So to the current case: Amy Coney Barrett, a judge on the Supreme Court in Washington, received an advance of two million dollars for a book in which she wants to explain that judges do not guide their verdicts on personal feelings should let. Amy Coney Barrett is a devout Catholic who was at the forefront of bringing Roe v. Wade” — the landmark ruling that until recently guaranteed American women the right to an abortion. Her book is to be published by Penguin Random House Verlag, which is owned by Bertelsmann.

Now 250 people who are part of American literary life - mainly editors, agents, publishing employees - have written an open letter protesting that the constitutional judge's book will be published by Penguin Random House. They are not concerned with restricting the right to freedom of expression, they emphasize, but the right to abortion is a human right enshrined in the United Nations Charter, and the Bertelsmann Group has committed itself to this charter internally, violating its own Rules when listing Amy Coney Barrett's book.

It will probably also be called this time: Censorship! Amy Coney Barrett should be able to say whatever she wants. Certainly; and no one disputes that. The only question is whether this publisher should print this book. Opinion can be divided on this, and the signatories to that open letter are exercising their right to freedom of expression by protesting. Incidentally, Peter Singer's book was published by a different publisher at the time; Singer is a tenured professor at Princeton University. No cancel culture anywhere.

Our prophecy: Amy Coney Barrett's opus will be published by Penguin Random House despite protests. And she will continue to be a judge on the Supreme Court in Washington, whose statements are not non-binding opinions but performative speech acts: With words, she will not only describe her view of things, but create facts. The next item on the agenda is likely to be the abolition of gay marriage at some point — perhaps at the same time as the book premiere.