It’s the highest court in the land, responsible for confronting the most significant and profound questions facing the nation. The Supreme Court of the United States has been charged with the solemn duty to not just serve justice, but to define the meaning of justice. Their decisions affect the lives of every American. Every schoolchild is taught this body’s import in the life and the history of America.
The notion of impartiality is one that every grownup comes to realize can only be an ideal. Humans are fallible, even the members of this august institution. As such, their thinking, their decisions, are unavoidably influenced by their biases and their lived experience. Over time, the Court has come to include more diverse justices—no longer only white, male and Christian—with the fervent hope that this would help ensure that the decisions reached most fully and fairly represent the ideals and principles of the nation which they serve.
Yet SCOTUS, once trusted and beloved by most Americans—right up there with God, baseball and apple pie—is now an institution whose credibility, even its legitimacy, is increasingly doubted. The growing assumption is that the highest court is not just fallible or human, it has been tainted by the poison of politics and the ideological fervor of a conservative supermajority. These six justices—three of whom were appointed for a lifetime by Donald J. Trump and two others who have not failed to make clear the depth of their anger and grievance—are using their extraordinary power to reshape the country. No matter the damage they may cause to the powerless, no matter their arrogance to toss aside decades of legal precedent to serve their interests, no matter the rights of women and people of color and those with a different sexual orientation. Damn the torpedoes, they insist as criticisms mount. Full speed ahead! Note the words of Justice Elena Kagan in her dissent of Friday’s decision to nullify President Joe Biden’s loan forgiveness plan: “In every respect, the Court today exceeds its proper, limited role in our Nation’s governance,” she wrote.
So here we are, left to wonder what our collective future holds with this body armed with such awesome power and such determination to exploit it. What do you think: How dangerous is the politicization of the Court? In turn, do you question whether it has been politicized? Are the justices defending a collective notion of justice or primarily seeking to mold America in their own private image? How worried are you about this trajectory? Despite President Biden’s reluctance to expand the Court—doing so would “politicize it maybe forever,” he said on Thursday—is this reform inevitable? How about implementing term limits? What are the long-term effects of this Court’s rulings that concern you most?
As always, I look forward to reading your observations and the opportunity for this community to learn from each other. Please do be respectful of each other.
America, America is sustained by paid subscriptions, making it possible to keep nearly all the writing available for everyone. If you’re not already a paid subscriber and can afford $50 a year or just $5 a month, I hope you’ll consider becoming one. If you are a teacher, on a fixed income or otherwise cannot afford it, let me know and I’ll apply a 50 percent discount on an annual subscription.
As a senior it is beyond discouraging to see the country being deliberately move backwards to the “entitled whites” frame of life. That the legal system is so out of touch with real justice, in favor of those who can buy their way into the courts, is the worst nightmare for democracy. That exact scenario was displayed this week, by a handful of ill equipped judges who are in the pockets of those who demand everything the voting public has said repeatedly they do not want. Even now with the settlement of a fictitious case which displays the danger this democracy faces from the current crop of paid for justices, there does not seem to be a remedy to their focus on moving democracy back decades.
John Philpot Curran's statement, "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." Or Thomas Jefferson's version, "eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liberty." Well, the Federalist Society has been vigilant and plotting to get us where we are today. Entitled rich men who think they have the Right.
The Supreme Court's six pawns, by the rules, are only allowed to move one space toward winning power for their king. Or diagonally if capturing... I feel captured and removed from the board and sitting in an enemy's confinement. We have played this game when Roosevelt got rid of the last robber barons. Let get jumping.
I have nothing to add, you are so correct EGP. I am so disgusted that this is happening in our country. I want it fixed. I think we were making great strides towards caring about others, regardless of their “Personal” beliefs. AS IT SHOULD BE. 🇺🇸🙏🏻♥️
How EXACTLY has it "moved back decades"( and who are said "entitled whites" ) by following the constitution? This voter agrees with everything they've done to promote safe life for EVERYONE. Exactly what is the "fictitious" case? If you make accusations, you need to back them up with facts not emotion.
My tone is very kind and concise and to the point as is your right to your perception. My perception is mine and allowed. The respondents on this page are left leaning as are the Beschloss brothers so naturally you are going to get the group mentality agreeing with the premise. So if you can't answer my questions, then you are correct: we have nothing else to say. Most of MY friends find what these people are saying to be pretty wrong and dangerous to the country. If you think this administration has not weaponized some agencies then you are not getting it. The left can never have a discussion without the emotional responses such as your big words, trying to out "intellectualize" the writer but I stay here so I know what you're thinking but not why. God Bless America.
You are a joke and not worth my time...bless your little heart....! God Bless America and hope it manages to avoid the crazies trying to destroy it such as people like you who can only sling ugliness. God bless you as well.
I am Canadian, so perhaps I may be out of line in commenting, but as someone who has watched American politics for decades I am alarmed by the current trend of SCOTUS. It seems that these 6 people have the power to create a country that is less equal and less just for anyone not a white male. Court reform should be a priority if SCOTUS is to maintain its status as a trusted institution. In Canada our Supreme Court justices must retire at 75. Perhaps that’s a starting point for yours.
I see three options: expand the court, establish term limits, or watch the institution burn. My money is on the last option...it is the way this country usually handles problems like this. I know this sounds cynical but face it. There is no way Biden will expand the court at least not before the election and probably not even after that. Term limits are probably the best option but that would require a constitutional amendment and that will not happen in today's environment. I suppose there is a final option. Alito and Thomas are corrupt enough to deserve impeachment and conviction but if that failed with Trump, it will not succeed with them. Nope. We are left with a burning building and that makes me sick at heart.
I looked it up. The Constitution says all federal judges shall serve during good behavior. So there is no fixed term, and even a lifetime term could be disputed based on this vague language. What does good behavior mean? Does accepting years of expensive gifts count as not-good behavior? What about overturning precedent on flimsy grounds? What about failing to recuse when it's obviously the correct thing to do?
Or one’s wife involved with a party who has cases in front of the court, and that supreme justice does not recuse himself? That is definitely a conflict of interest!
I can't believe no one has commented yet! I'll start it off by stating that hell yes, the politicization of the Supreme Court is dangerous! In fact, it may be deadly to this democracy experiment started by our Founders, who obviously could not have imagined in a million years what's going on in the USA here and now. IMHO it's past time for the Court to be expanded - it was expanded to nine Justices to be equivalent to the amount of district court jurisdictions, and now that there are thirteen district court jurisdictions it should be expanded again. But even if President Biden decided to (reluctantly) proceed with expansion TODAY, and even if expansion were successful TODAY, he wouldn't be able to appoint any new Justices because I'm sure Quiverin' Qevin would follow McTurtle's lead in declaring that the next election is only a year away so it's too soon to appoint any new Justices. The whole situation makes me physically ill. I doubt there's any way this country won't revert even further back to pre-Civil War laws, i.e., Jim Crow and all that. I'm only grateful that I'm old enough that I probably won't live to see the worst of it, but my grandchildren will and I do fear for their future. God help us all!
The Court only reflects me in one way: some of them are white men, like me. That's it. Several of them are Catholics, and I was raised a Protestant (I'm now a None). Six of them are "conservative" (reactionary, really). Six of them are Republicans. So this isn't my Court in all the ways that count for me. As to politicization, it's already far down that road. FDR was accused of wanting to pack the court. Trump did it, along with McConnell. When the 2024 election is over, and Democrats have the Congress and Presidency again, I think we must remake this court so it's more balanced, and more like the people it's supposed to serve, not the people who packed it.
The perfect approach is to amend the Judiciary Act to allow the court to expand to 13 justices (13 judicial circuits, 13 justices). Congress has that power, no question.
In addition to that, I read that the Justices' places could be filled from the senior members of the Federal bench on a rotating basis, so you wouldn't have the same people all the time. That would also make it less of a fight to get a new appointment approved, since it wouldn't be for a lifetime seat on the Court.
McCarthy will not bring it to the floor of the House for a vote, and McConnell will not allow his minority to vote for it in the Senate.
Democrats have to do everything in their power to retake the House, increase the Senate, and retain the Presidency. So far, they are not aggressive enough to do so.
Perhaps I’m just too pessimistic. But I don’t hear people on the street discussing the Democrats achievements. The people in Kentucky don’t even know that this year’s high speed internet access is due to Biden and the Dems!
I fear that any Democratic effort to "remake" the court will be decried by the GOP as a weaponization of the government (Judiciary); they would be correct.
Personally, I think we should unleash Richard Painter on Thomas and Alito for ethics violations and if that ends in impeachment, so be it.
Regarding Lorie Smith the web designer stating on her 1st ammendments right to refuse a same sex marriage client request even legitimate since it appears to have been a staged hoax...if it was a scam does that negate the deciaion..?
Point here is, these Justices all sat there straight faced, SWORE they would not base decision on Conjecture, YET they let this "What if" broad bring a case with her homophobic twisted hate. IF she started a web site design, could she refuse certain classes. I beg Pres Biden to name more Justices while we have a chance to save this country
I havenʻt read the case but standing (and possible fraud!) certainly seem to be issues. Apparently the so-called gay person seeking web design services is a straight married man with kids who didnʻt send an email to the web designer. The web designer is represented by one of those right wing Christian "interest groups" so the whole thing looks like a fake case.
It should, bc "standing". Indeed they never should have taken the case. But, who is going to negate the decision? Not they themselves, obviously. So, if it falls on the lower courts which higher court decisions they'll pick and choose, so endeth the Rule of Law in this country: we become Putin's Russia; Rule BY Law. Which is just what these popish fascists want.
If true, I’m outraged that this gang of six is so politicized that they reject any concept of laws. They are irrelevant and are illegitimate. I hope that the Senate Judiciary Committee opens an investigation. The gloves have to come off and subpoenas must be issued to the gang. If they refuse contempt of Congress charges should be referred to the DOJ. Talk about the weaponization of government.
Mr. B asks if the Court is dangerous. Overturning precedent, old and recent; ignoring issues of standing; clawing back freedoms enjoyed for 50 years; deciding issues where no case or controversy exists; sweeping up power by making up doctrine out of thin air; explicitly countering settled legislation regimes(Clean Water Act) from the bench. I'd say very dangerous. The Court's only lever is it's perceived legitimacy reached by reasoned decisions. Acting contrary to popular majorities of 70% on issues, in a perceived political game of ends justifying the means, will inevitably lead to them being viewed as illegitimate requiring drastic measures to correct their wandering, including term limits and/or expanding the Court. That would be better then the alternative of simply ignoring the Court.
This makes me think of Aristotle's idea of "the watchmen".....and the accompanying concern about "who watches the watchmen?" I do think that the court has been overly politicized. It seems to me that this is one more governing "norm" in which Trump crossed the line and did not choose sufficiently experienced or moderate jurists. And, of course, McConnell played his part by blocking President Obama from installing Merrick Garland, or anyone, in 2016. With that said, I do agree with President Biden that packing the court would be a mistake. Because it could always be packed still further by a Republican administration (of course that could still happen anyway). The key, I think, is to win elections. There is no excuse for those who disagree with Trump and Trumpism and this Supreme Court not to come out to vote. Even if Joe Biden is not their first choice (and I actually think he has done a very good job considering the situation he inherited and the limitations of the current situation as well), the alternative is almost unthinkable. We got a preview of that from 2017-2021 and the sequel is certain to be worse given the learning curve that Trump is on. We might have had three progressive justices if not for "Bernie or bust" progressives who didn't see the difference between Hillary Clinton and Trump. So, there has to be an all out effort to win as many elections as possible. And then also to implement some reforms to the Supreme Court, especially addressing the conflict of interest issues that have arisen with Thomas and Alito. And perhaps a minimum experience level that must be met in the future as well. Thanks as always for your important and insightful posts, Steven!
Well said sir...you made several points that are important - we must win elections. Ordinary people must vote, at ever level. I too agree that the Biden Administration has been successful and got some good legislation passed, which Republicans who did not support it are all taking credit for before their constituents. I think Biden's foreign policy experience and experience in Congress have had a great deal to do with his success. "There is no excuse for those who disagree with Trump and Trumpism and this Supreme Court not to come out to vote."
The Court has been corrupted and contaminated for quite some time. To be "conservative" does NOT mean to be the oppressor. Yet, this Court has become increasingly poisoned by its penchant to embrace personal ideology and bias over objective and fair jurisprudence. That this Court actually ruled on a mythical case underscores how tainted this Court has become. Jurisprudence has given way to judicial bias; not judicial fairness and objectivity. With this contrived "case", the Court's "whatifism" has set the once-revered and respected institution onto a very dangerous path. That path is destructive by intention. Having just turned 79 years-old and a Veteran, I am in anguish over the plight of our country. The resident damage already done coupled with future such antics bodes a sinister and dark future for the United States. The arbiters of justice have co-authorized a "justice denied". Those arbitors of INjustice have become the siamese twin to the Republican Legislative Branch. A pall of darkness is draping itself across the land, a land cherished by ancestors and me. Where I once stood proud as very young USAF Sergeant, I now stand in dismay, disbelief and sorrow; AND, distrust.
This is most thoughtful. Thank you, back! My family has served our country since The American Revolutionary War, where my distant paternal grandfather fought with the Virginia 9th Regiment. Two uncles in WWII, older and younger brothers. I was Vietnam Era; classified Intel overseas; remote sites.
The six reprehensible ones may hide behind their robes and the trappings of office, but their words and actions expose them as the corrupt, unenlightened bigots that they are.
Why is anyone surprised that they ruled that the President’s plan to forgive student debt is “illegal?” The simple fact of the matter is that these judges are looking to ensure that education, like healthcare, is treated as an expensive commodity for sale. What better way to ensure that only the rich are well educated and healthy? Face it: the Republican agenda is to ensure that there is a barely literate workforce that is forever in hock and only capable of working in factories and fighting in wars.
The irony is that it is the very people who are hurt most by these fatwas who will turn out to vote for the fascists in droves. This must change.
I am still here (age 82 now) and am distressed. I was a teacher and regularly wonder if we teachers were failures over 2-3 generations. How could we be behaving and voting as we do!
I too am an educator of 23 years, a former director of admissions at the University of Florida whose legacy work has also been upended. I have voted blue in what used to be a state that was purple and has since turned blood red. You didn’t do anything wrong. The country has taken a hard right. My mother, also a teacher, was born in the same decade as you and though she is no longer here, she and my grandmother would be horrified. I stand with you and all the teachers who dedicated their lives and careers to making the world a better place. I know how this feels and just know you have my support. Your contributions meant something and are appreciated. Take care and be well. 🙏
While I want to blame the court for so much I disagree with, I begrudgingly accept that wrong thinking is an eye-of-the-beholder thing. The two things that do wreck their credibility for me are 1. The unwillingness of Roberts to adopt any ethical standards as seen by unaddressed and unpunished blatant conflicts of interests, and 2. The irresponsible confirmation processes that a. Didn't consider Obama's nominee, and b. Made a vastly inadequate effort to properly vet Kavanaugh or Barrett.
The court has been both politicized and corrupted, and will remain so for as long as it is allowed to remain in its current lopsided state. Balance and ethics must be restored now. Why is Roberts “chief justice”? What is the point of a chief justice who does does not lead?
Politicization? Hell, this is against the very foundation of what this country was supposed to be. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address in 1863 said "“that these dead shall not have died in vain– that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” . WHERE is the government by and for the People? 61% of Americans approve of Abortion, yet they took away Roe v Wade. 54% of Americans think Affirmative Action is necessary in this racist country, but they took that away in schools. Employment will be next. Abolishing Contraception will be coming. These Fanatical Right wing SCOTUS Justices are out to make this country a theocracy, even a dictatorship. They vote how their Masters tell them to vote, and receive Monetary rewards for voting that way. It is time, Americans, to take this country BACK from the Right. WHY are we allowing 6 Radical Justices to put us back 100 yrs. VOTE BLUE, people, like your children and grandchildren depend on it.
I believe this is the most dangerous threat to our democracy. I am disgusted by the six conservative justices who were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote. Perhaps only presidents that win the popular vote should get to appoint justices.
Everything from the far right seems to be projection. For years they accused scotus of being filled with activist judges that were legislating from the bench. Now the federalist society has ensured that is exactly what we have.
In years past it doesn't seem like scotus would issue such narrow rulings. Student loan forgiveness being unconstitutional? What about the PPP? And all the business subsidies the federal govt has given over the years? Is it only unconstitutional when the beneficiaries are college students?
Where is the fine line between a business not serving a customer because of dress codes, unruliness, etc., and outright discrimination? What is the difference between not serving gay people and not serving black people during segregation? Did scotus just give Christians the right to discriminate against anyone? Or did they give anyone the right to anyone to discriminate against homosexuals? Or is it just that Christians are allowed to discriminate against homosexuals?
My 12-year-old interviewed Bunny, a trans woman, for a school project. Bunny said she doesn’t need CIS people to like her, she just wants the same Constitutional rights and protections that every other citizen has.
Republicans are attacking our LGBTQ+ citizens, relegating them to an inferior political status, a place where prejudiced people can cancel their equality in not just private settings, but also publicly funded ones. At what point will restaurants post signs saying “No Gays” and create separate water fountains? It’s awful, and we should all know better.
And why is this? Because Republican politicians believe homophobic Republican voters will turn out in droves in 2024 and return them to power. And, of course, they are right about the droves, let’s pray their wrong about returning to power.
e pluribus are divided, American citizen against American citizen, using hate, promoting discrimination of a politically vulnerable minority to gain power.
How can decent person vote for these awful politicians? For tax cuts? Really?
I am feeling sad and angry in equal measure today. Just over a decade ago I felt such joy when the SCOTUS recognized my right to marry my wife. Now, the same institution with it's three new 'justices', put up by an illegitimate and criminal president, and the old ones, bought and paid for by leo Leonard's billionaire buds, is bent on removing our rights both as LGBT folk and as women. I wish we could remove the latest three but know that instead we must vote in every election for decent people in all open positions up and down the ballot. When majorities are held once again by people who believe in democracy and in settled law hopefully we will have the will to return the SCOTUS to a forward thinking constitution and law abiding body with the good will for the citizens uppermost in their judgements. Imagine.
The reversal of Roe v Wade took away the faith in settled law based on previous SC decision that we had depended on for nearly 50 years.
Justice Thomas stated wish at the time of the Roe v Wade decision to revisit all decisions based on the 14th amendment in which he specifically mentioned same sex marriage among others. This is again placing a target on settled law and our marriage.
The recent case of the web designer who was concerned her business might have to create a site to celebrate a same sex marriage that changed Colorado's state law that was intended to protect the rights of all their citizens to be served by all businesses serving the public. This attacked a state's right to protect lgbtq people in any state. This makes us second class citizens again at the state level even in states that have worked hard to protect every one of their citizens. This gives one religion, one belief system, more significance than my existence and my rights.
If you don't understand it is because you do not want to understand.
The Supreme Court is the Real Coup. They left a deliberate opening in Moore v Harper”
I fear real axe is coming when they throw voting rights back to these Republican majority state legislatures to overthrow the will of the people. They will throw our Democracy away forever. All for money. All because of Citizens United. They have been bought big time. This is why they are so bold and so are all the Republicans…no platform, just removing rights one after another. The fix is in!
It feels like the pool table has been tilted violently to return the country to an earlier, less equal, and less diverse condition. Setting aside that it’s not ‘conservative’ but rather radical, the dangerous part is that it adds to general feelings of confusion, uncertainty, anger, and fear. All of which lays ample opportunity for a strongman-authoritarian who “can fix it all.” My small pushback is always reminding people to not just throw up our hands and marvel at it as spectators. Get in there - vote, of course, but also campaign for your candidate, volunteer in your community, attend speaking events and town halls. Show up! Especially if you’re a POC in a predominantly white area like me.
As an American living in Australia now I cringe each day turning on the news. The corrupt supreme court reveal their weaknesses daily. After accepting huge gifts from the billionaires who own them, they sit straight faced in their robes and turn the American social order back 60 years. Thomas has such a chip on his shoulder he is bent sideways and is still married to his very white supremacist wife who was proved to be in direct control and contact with Trump during the insurrection. Kavanaugh is a drunk. Alito seems to just be sadistic. WTAF?
Beschloss comments will always side with Democrats so it's just a left point of view. The court is doing what it's supposed to do. Why must you politicize everything and everyone that you disagree with, just like dad and brother? Credibility? Hmmmm.
So, in the Dobbs case, the court was supposed to ignore stare decisis? And in the web designer case, the court was supposed to overlook the fact that there was no standing because no gay person ever sent the web designer an email requesting services (so there was also fraud). Google it.
The court was supposed to turn it to the states and court had nothing to do with their decisions. It's a moot point. Web designer speaks of a hypotethical situation (clearly explained) remember the cake people issue and wanted to clarify her rules. Like when restaurants say, "no shirt, no service" a business owner should be able to say yes or no to a job.
The logic for their rulings is tortured & at least two of them are guilty of ethics violations, for which I would have been kicked off the bench and disbarred.
Oh, come on, it's clearly all backed up in their decisions as written. What ethics do you think have been violated? More left anger because it didn't go the way you "thought" it should?
I could have been reprimanded, if not removed from office, for selling my daughter’s Girl Scout cookies or school fundraiser raffle tickets due to “appearance of impropriety” if any attorneys who may be in my court in the future might try to “get on my good side” by buying cookies or raffle tickets (neither of which actually benefit me).
The fact that two of the Justices have received tens of thousands of unsolicited gifts (and failed to correctly disclose them until caught) is a huge ethics red flag. Regardless of whether or not SCOTUS has actual ethics rules, the rules of the legal profession ban such conduct. As does our Oath to preserve and protect the Constitution.
In editing, my comment got removed. To paraphrase; I understand your point of view, my husband was a CEO, decided not to take gifts for that reason. However, there is no such rule in place for the court but is likely one soon will be. It's a slippery slope because who can say who our friends are? Failure to correctly disclose them is not accurate according to what I have read several different places.
There are ethics rules for lawyers regardless of the lack of ethics rules for SCOTUS. It’s beyond the pale to think that once one receives the highest lifetime appointment the basic ethics rules no longer apply. We must be beyond reproach. Stunning.
It’s incredibly sad that you’re blind to what’s happening with the Supreme Court. The “right” leaning justices have upended decades of precedent & given all kinds of ass backward reasoning for their decisions- cases that were brought before them for exacty that purpose, by the same Christian nationalist groups that clearly own clowns like Alito & Thomas. It’s not “left anger” sunshine, it’s the fury of a majority having their rights stripped by a clique of hypocritical religious zealots appointed by a president that lost the popular vote
When a court makes a decision without anyone having standing as in the website creator's suit, should send a chill down everyone's back. There's no need for standing, just file an action and a right-wing group will fund the case through the courts. WOW! Wouldn't a lot of us who may have been wronged by a group, corporation or a person love to be able to have the resources to file a suit and have it race to the head of the line through finding an agreeable judge and all the other necessary tactics, and then have the SCOTUS say, "Screw you, America. We have God on our side, so f...you!" This is being done by the evangelicals and right-wing troupes with the resources to thumb their noses at a system that was not designed for such antics. The three Trump judges who lied to the Senate to get their seats are thumbing their noses at the country and the world. When Biden wins in 2024, in 2025 he should make sure that the SCOTUS is revamped with at least five new justices along with set terms. Of course, this means winning the Senate. That must be the goal, then, mustn't it?
I feel fairly certain some type of schedule could be worked out with addition of justices and retirement of justices. Do this on a rolling basis, if you have 16 years on the court, you are retired. And those achieving 16 years also are retired. The four new justices with simply take over this position on the court. The even number, criticism? PI don’t really consider that a big deal since they worked for almost a year after McConnell’s failure to bring Mr. Garland up for a vote and we had an 8 Member Court.
I lean more conservative, but I am appalled at the way SCOTUS creates legislation, instead of the judicial review Marshall began and Taney championed. Justices should be above political parties, above lobbying, above personal beliefs. If you decide a court case based upon your own paradigm, than you have failed. SCOTUS is a balancing branch that makes sure the legislative body creates laws the affect the body politic equally, and effectively, while keeping the executive branch the leader of our representative democracy. They shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily overturn laws due to religious beliefs or preconceptions. They shouldn't prevent the president from being, well the president. They shouldn't support an executive who thinks he's a one man show; they shouldn't defend laws that keep a minority (read: cis, old, white men) in power. If you cannot be objective, you shouldn't become a judge - in any capacity. There will be some conceptions they bring in, because we're all human, and no one is perfect. You will have some biases, but you shouldn't be ruled by them. We can't expect previous experience - law school, clerking, private practice, previous positions - to be wiped away. In fact, a blank template justice would be a terrible thing! There is a legitimate need for experience. It's just that that experience shouldn't be gained at the expense of the many for the reward of the few.
In GA, we elect all our judges; I wonder what would happen if we went back to state legislatures appointing Senators, but voted for our SCOTUS? All congressman need term limits; we need better ways to impeach our leaders, without it becoming a circus. When men like Thomas can serve for what seems like a century and women like Ginsburg force themselves to the physical brink because they're terrified of what will happen to people when they die - we need to amend our laws. The Constitution was written for a different century, hell, a different millennium! We need to gut and repair, instead of patching holes and white washing. White, wealthy men created it so white, wealthy men would remain so. It may be a living document, but it's got cataracts and emphysema.
We’ve seen reason aplenty of late to conclude that the process by which SCOTUS justices are selected is defective, as are the terms of the deal (lifetime appointments with virtually no strings, restraints, oversight, or guiding leadership influence.) In short, the court is badly broken, the net result being that its decisions are no longer trusted or respected, let alone looked up to. As a start, following are some potential changes to consider:
1. Instead of lifetime appointments, justices should be appointed to staggered, renewable, 6-year terms, with a maximum service period of 20 years (allowing for brief overlap in the event of unexpected “retirement” of a justice.)
2. SCOTUS nominations will be made by a panel consisting of the Senate Minority and Majority leaders, and the incumbent Chief Justice, with nominations approved by vote of the entire senate.
3. The existing pipeline for SCOTUS justice candidates should be widened considerably.
4. But for their personal residence and attendant belongings, employees of the Court (including justices) may have no investible assets with aggregate value in excess of $1/2 million outside of a blind trust.
5. Any mmember of the SCOTUS may be removed from duty (for cause) by the Chief Justice, with disposition of the matter resolved by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The court has changed numbers 6 times in the past. If more are added, only to make it more like the Democrats, why wouldn't Republicans do the same next time in power? It needs input from both so all people are represented. The 1st court had 6 members, with problems-Jay because of his treaty with Britain, Wilson sent to prison for bad debts, Rutledge who tried suicide, Harrison died. Blair ok, house where Truman stayed while White House renovated and where his assassination attempted. When I was in high school, we knew the names of all the justices. Who could forget a name like Felix Frankfurter? There has always been controversy over Court members and decisions. The 13th, 14th amendments did not help civil rights. Lynchings continued as did segregation in schools, busses, lunch counters and even drinking fountains. Court agreed.
States determine school subjects. Concentration for years has been on achieving higher scores in math and English language., History gone by the wayside, many teachers, themselves raised this way now unknowledgeable about history's truths.Same goes for young parents who now raise voices at school board meetings demanding to determine what their children are taught. Well, fact is, 1 in 3 couldn't pass a citizenship test; 22% cannot name the 3 branches of gov't. Those who watched We Are Marshall have no idea who Marshall was. A man living in Polk County, FL had no idea Polk was a president. With my little retirement job in a grocery store, I keep asking people when they pay or get change, who is on that $100 bill, $50 bill? No one ever knows. They know Mick Jagger is selling his house. So, who is really concerned about Court decisions?
Only 7.1% of Americans are trans or gay.Women care; fed up with Republican and Court decisions against them,I think the abortion issue will be a big factor in upcoming elections.College students with debts . Being a Democrat, a party that allows diverse thinking, I disagree with paying off those debts. Time should be paid getting schools to lower admission costs, banks to lower interest rates. $70K+ yearly rates are unconscionable. There should be more scholarships, grants plus people need to receive bigger paychecks from greedy companies. A man working as a car mechanic should not have to pay for one majoring in medicine who will go on to earn much more than the mechanic who got him there.
It does no good to just repeat what is happening in the Court and Congress.Those of us who care already know. It is a solution that needs to be addressed for the problems of today. I will always believe,
it is improved public education which in turn decides how a person votes and the future of this country.
It’s too late to worry about politicization of the SCOTUS, it’s obviously happened. The question remains, just WTF 🤬 are Democrats going to do about it.
Who am I? Who are you? In this country we are still allowed to have our own opinions. The view in America is not to kill someone. There's your rub. It's against the law. All women DO have access to birth control today. I am not going to get into the many ways. It IS available and so are condoms at the drugstore. Were this pre-1960 and the advent of birth control pills, it would be a different story. Taking a life is a crime. Next you will want to choose who you think should live or die in this world. Any sense of decency knows society does NOT condone killing a life. I am sure you are one of those people who believes in PETA but doesn't give the same right to the human species.
Of course anyone with the conditions you mentioned will be treated by their doctor to "save the life of the mother". Don't think your snide remarks affect me whatsoever, it just shows me who YOU are. The view of society is you don't kill another person and a fertilized sperm IS a person whether you want to admit it or not. Nature will take its course, some will live and some will abort and others will need medical intervention as mentioned above. If you have an emergency surgery needed, a hospital will give it to you as lifesaving. Using abortion as birth control is not taking responsibility for your actions. I do not want MY tax money going to fix your lack of responsibility. Of course there always has to be a racial component in every attack today. Get over that. It's propaganda. You reap what you sow. Do the right thing and your life will be as good as anyone else. Life is NOT fair, you know. Life is not perfect. Think about that. Whining about what you are not getting for ME ME ME is not how it works. You have a great life and be responsible in all that you do. Then you will be a happy person.
You say that SCOTUS has been “tainted by the poison of politics and the ideological fervor of a conservative supermajority.”
I am not sure that’s correct. While three of them are on the court thanks to trump, did he ever really have a “supermajority,” 66 Senators? I think we are being controlled--with the present SCOTUS’s help--by *minority* rule, which has been the long term plan by a minority of white men.
And yes, absolutely, the SCOTUS at this point in time is illegitimate, makes unconstitutional decisions, and has the trustworthiness of a murder of crows (as in a group of crows being an omen of death).
Remedies are possible.
1. Subject SCOTUS to voters since they make political decisions.
2. Ethics rules with mandated recusals.
3. Term limits
4. Forced retirement age. 72 perhaps?
5. Increase the bench to 13.
6. Impeachment for ethics rules break.
None of those things will occur while McCarthy holds the gavel. But when we win back the house, SCOTUS must be a priority of the first order.
Everyone requires checks and balances. Without that, the human mind plays a game of chicken based on
it's perceived odds of being caught and the seriousness of the transgression. Prefabricated excuses are at the ready, just in case. Allowing a lifetime position is ludicrous just for this reason. Mankind is not based on honesty and integrity without consequences. The three newest members had already lied to be confirmed. They should have been expelled the moment their views changed. That should have been a wake up call. Our nation is in such turmoil and these infractions go free without consequence. Summonses ignored, theft of PPL loans, lying under oath. NO ONE SHOULD BE APPOINTED TO A LIFETIME POSITION. Humans are not that honest.
Steven, you have a unique ability to cut through the noise and chaos to shine a light on the most important issues we face. To answer your question of how dangerous is this...in my opinion, maybe the most dangerous. This small group of people have the ability to shape the values and laws that all Americans will live by. Is it even realistic to think that humans are even capable of doing it in an impartial way? I welcome this debate because the future existence of our country depends on it.
Clearly, the current Court is not representative of American society of the day. The recent decisions show an eagerness to promote conservatism that is at odds with judicial impartiality in its one-sidedness. Overturning Roe disregarded stare decisis and finding in favor in the right to discriminate is clearly ideological, favoring reactionary forces. In another case, the right of government agencies, like the EPA, to set policy was curtailed. This damages the US government’s credibility, both nationally and internationally. And there are more examples of this Court expanding its power at the cost of its neutral status.
The solution must be to institute term limits for the Justices, so that the Court better reflects the society it is supposed to serve. Ethical rules should also be set and strictly adhered to.
At the heart of the issue is public trust of the institution. When trust is eroded, society as a whole loses. Such trust takes a long time to build back up, during which time the Nation becomes vulnerable to extremist influences.
I listen to a podcast called Sister In Law - excellent and highly recommended. They suggest that the curtailing of the EPA, and many of these ridiculous rulings, are a way for SCOTUS to follow the far right agenda of limiting government and shrinking it. By curtailing the agencies to where they can’t do their jobs, they hope to reduce the administrative government. Seems like a reasonable assumption in light of the EPA and the FDA rulings we’re seeing from other Federalist Society judges (mifepristone for instance).
It is a Robber court! It has robbed the Supreme Court of Ethics, it has robbed the protections for voters, it has robbed America of equal protection under the law, it has robbed America of the ability to protect our waters and air, it has robbed American women of rights over their body, it has robbed our trust in election information with Citizens Inited, it has robbed our Chief executive of his ability to assist students in need. This is not a Robert’s court it is a robber court fleecing Americans of rights.
The fact that the modern GOP controls SCOTUS is the result of a 50+ year strategy to control appointments. McConnell has been a master at using his power to appoint right wing zealots to judgeships across the country. The only way to win back the Court is by a similar strategy, aimed at one judge at a time. The number of judges will not be increased with a divided Congress; term limits won’t be imposed when the GOP controls governments in so many states; Alito and Thomas won’t be impeached with the GOP controlling the House. The only solution--the ONLY solution--is to organize and win seats, district by district, state by state. It will take lots of money, so make political donations wisely, frequently, and with the urgency today’s America demands.
So, what do you think is supposed to happen when the President encroaches on the constitutional power of Congress? Who else can settle that but the courts? Doesn't seem like a high crime or misdemeanor. And what if Congress should encroach on the constitutional power of the presidency?
I believe that when it comes to the politicization of the Extreme Court, that ship sailed long ago. The fact that we are now aware not just of the liars and incompetent who were placed by Trump, but by the corrupt billionaire lackeys already in place, it’s time to burn the whole thing down. Increase the size and put in term limits.
We can all see how dangerous this court is. Term limits need to be applied. Several have mentioned rotating justices. And definitely a code of ethics needs to be established. Kavanaugh should never have been permitted to be appointed. Thomas should be impeached. But none of this will happen and they will continue to erode the rights of women, persons of color and all marginalized groups. Disgusting.
Any elected official should also have term limits. Kavanaugh and Thomas are fine. Women's rights are not eroded, they have a choice. This is not 1950. Rights are not being eroded. People are eroding themselves by not doing what it takes to get a head. Choices are made watching the media, internet and cell phones. Common sense and the Golden Rule would be a good place for anyone with any brains to start with and maybe adding to society instead of constantly whining, griping and wanting more for themselves. Disgusting what society has turned into in my lifetime.
The U.S. government isn't for the people and never was. The leaders, both elected and unelected, serve the interests of the ownership class all the way back to the Founding Fathers. What's good for the People only matters when it serves the larger interests of the corporations. In recent years that basic fact has become too obvious to ignore. The United Corporations of America is where you live and you have two choices before you if you aren't happy about it: defect to another country that actually has a democracy or join the Revolution.
As a senior it is beyond discouraging to see the country being deliberately move backwards to the “entitled whites” frame of life. That the legal system is so out of touch with real justice, in favor of those who can buy their way into the courts, is the worst nightmare for democracy. That exact scenario was displayed this week, by a handful of ill equipped judges who are in the pockets of those who demand everything the voting public has said repeatedly they do not want. Even now with the settlement of a fictitious case which displays the danger this democracy faces from the current crop of paid for justices, there does not seem to be a remedy to their focus on moving democracy back decades.
John Philpot Curran's statement, "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." Or Thomas Jefferson's version, "eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liberty." Well, the Federalist Society has been vigilant and plotting to get us where we are today. Entitled rich men who think they have the Right.
The Supreme Court's six pawns, by the rules, are only allowed to move one space toward winning power for their king. Or diagonally if capturing... I feel captured and removed from the board and sitting in an enemy's confinement. We have played this game when Roosevelt got rid of the last robber barons. Let get jumping.
I have nothing to add, you are so correct EGP. I am so disgusted that this is happening in our country. I want it fixed. I think we were making great strides towards caring about others, regardless of their “Personal” beliefs. AS IT SHOULD BE. 🇺🇸🙏🏻♥️
EGP - I agree 100%! Well said!
How EXACTLY has it "moved back decades"( and who are said "entitled whites" ) by following the constitution? This voter agrees with everything they've done to promote safe life for EVERYONE. Exactly what is the "fictitious" case? If you make accusations, you need to back them up with facts not emotion.
My tone is very kind and concise and to the point as is your right to your perception. My perception is mine and allowed. The respondents on this page are left leaning as are the Beschloss brothers so naturally you are going to get the group mentality agreeing with the premise. So if you can't answer my questions, then you are correct: we have nothing else to say. Most of MY friends find what these people are saying to be pretty wrong and dangerous to the country. If you think this administration has not weaponized some agencies then you are not getting it. The left can never have a discussion without the emotional responses such as your big words, trying to out "intellectualize" the writer but I stay here so I know what you're thinking but not why. God Bless America.
You are a joke and not worth my time...bless your little heart....! God Bless America and hope it manages to avoid the crazies trying to destroy it such as people like you who can only sling ugliness. God bless you as well.
I am Canadian, so perhaps I may be out of line in commenting, but as someone who has watched American politics for decades I am alarmed by the current trend of SCOTUS. It seems that these 6 people have the power to create a country that is less equal and less just for anyone not a white male. Court reform should be a priority if SCOTUS is to maintain its status as a trusted institution. In Canada our Supreme Court justices must retire at 75. Perhaps that’s a starting point for yours.
Happy Canada Day!! 🇨🇦🇺🇸🇨🇦
Thank you for your clear headed input!
Your country is a mess so please stay out of ours. Thank you.
I see three options: expand the court, establish term limits, or watch the institution burn. My money is on the last option...it is the way this country usually handles problems like this. I know this sounds cynical but face it. There is no way Biden will expand the court at least not before the election and probably not even after that. Term limits are probably the best option but that would require a constitutional amendment and that will not happen in today's environment. I suppose there is a final option. Alito and Thomas are corrupt enough to deserve impeachment and conviction but if that failed with Trump, it will not succeed with them. Nope. We are left with a burning building and that makes me sick at heart.
I don’t think term limits would require an amendment. I haven’t looked it up, but I don’t think the term is specified.
I looked it up. The Constitution says all federal judges shall serve during good behavior. So there is no fixed term, and even a lifetime term could be disputed based on this vague language. What does good behavior mean? Does accepting years of expensive gifts count as not-good behavior? What about overturning precedent on flimsy grounds? What about failing to recuse when it's obviously the correct thing to do?
I do not understand how accepting expensive gifts is not flagrant bribery.
Or one’s wife involved with a party who has cases in front of the court, and that supreme justice does not recuse himself? That is definitely a conflict of interest!
Sadly, I agree with you.
I can't believe no one has commented yet! I'll start it off by stating that hell yes, the politicization of the Supreme Court is dangerous! In fact, it may be deadly to this democracy experiment started by our Founders, who obviously could not have imagined in a million years what's going on in the USA here and now. IMHO it's past time for the Court to be expanded - it was expanded to nine Justices to be equivalent to the amount of district court jurisdictions, and now that there are thirteen district court jurisdictions it should be expanded again. But even if President Biden decided to (reluctantly) proceed with expansion TODAY, and even if expansion were successful TODAY, he wouldn't be able to appoint any new Justices because I'm sure Quiverin' Qevin would follow McTurtle's lead in declaring that the next election is only a year away so it's too soon to appoint any new Justices. The whole situation makes me physically ill. I doubt there's any way this country won't revert even further back to pre-Civil War laws, i.e., Jim Crow and all that. I'm only grateful that I'm old enough that I probably won't live to see the worst of it, but my grandchildren will and I do fear for their future. God help us all!
I don't think My Kevin has a say in SCOTUS appointments as the Senate confirms them.
The Court only reflects me in one way: some of them are white men, like me. That's it. Several of them are Catholics, and I was raised a Protestant (I'm now a None). Six of them are "conservative" (reactionary, really). Six of them are Republicans. So this isn't my Court in all the ways that count for me. As to politicization, it's already far down that road. FDR was accused of wanting to pack the court. Trump did it, along with McConnell. When the 2024 election is over, and Democrats have the Congress and Presidency again, I think we must remake this court so it's more balanced, and more like the people it's supposed to serve, not the people who packed it.
The perfect approach is to amend the Judiciary Act to allow the court to expand to 13 justices (13 judicial circuits, 13 justices). Congress has that power, no question.
In addition to that, I read that the Justices' places could be filled from the senior members of the Federal bench on a rotating basis, so you wouldn't have the same people all the time. That would also make it less of a fight to get a new appointment approved, since it wouldn't be for a lifetime seat on the Court.
Good idea!
Congress does not have the Will.
McCarthy will not bring it to the floor of the House for a vote, and McConnell will not allow his minority to vote for it in the Senate.
Democrats have to do everything in their power to retake the House, increase the Senate, and retain the Presidency. So far, they are not aggressive enough to do so.
Perhaps I’m just too pessimistic. But I don’t hear people on the street discussing the Democrats achievements. The people in Kentucky don’t even know that this year’s high speed internet access is due to Biden and the Dems!
I fear that any Democratic effort to "remake" the court will be decried by the GOP as a weaponization of the government (Judiciary); they would be correct.
Personally, I think we should unleash Richard Painter on Thomas and Alito for ethics violations and if that ends in impeachment, so be it.
Actually it will be undoing the Republican weaponization of Leo & Co. They’ve been systematic about it for years.
Correct.
Regarding Lorie Smith the web designer stating on her 1st ammendments right to refuse a same sex marriage client request even legitimate since it appears to have been a staged hoax...if it was a scam does that negate the deciaion..?
Point here is, these Justices all sat there straight faced, SWORE they would not base decision on Conjecture, YET they let this "What if" broad bring a case with her homophobic twisted hate. IF she started a web site design, could she refuse certain classes. I beg Pres Biden to name more Justices while we have a chance to save this country
I havenʻt read the case but standing (and possible fraud!) certainly seem to be issues. Apparently the so-called gay person seeking web design services is a straight married man with kids who didnʻt send an email to the web designer. The web designer is represented by one of those right wing Christian "interest groups" so the whole thing looks like a fake case.
And one justice pointed out that this was a theoretical stand not an actual issue and thus it should have been declined by the court.
It should, bc "standing". Indeed they never should have taken the case. But, who is going to negate the decision? Not they themselves, obviously. So, if it falls on the lower courts which higher court decisions they'll pick and choose, so endeth the Rule of Law in this country: we become Putin's Russia; Rule BY Law. Which is just what these popish fascists want.
If true, I’m outraged that this gang of six is so politicized that they reject any concept of laws. They are irrelevant and are illegitimate. I hope that the Senate Judiciary Committee opens an investigation. The gloves have to come off and subpoenas must be issued to the gang. If they refuse contempt of Congress charges should be referred to the DOJ. Talk about the weaponization of government.
Mr. B asks if the Court is dangerous. Overturning precedent, old and recent; ignoring issues of standing; clawing back freedoms enjoyed for 50 years; deciding issues where no case or controversy exists; sweeping up power by making up doctrine out of thin air; explicitly countering settled legislation regimes(Clean Water Act) from the bench. I'd say very dangerous. The Court's only lever is it's perceived legitimacy reached by reasoned decisions. Acting contrary to popular majorities of 70% on issues, in a perceived political game of ends justifying the means, will inevitably lead to them being viewed as illegitimate requiring drastic measures to correct their wandering, including term limits and/or expanding the Court. That would be better then the alternative of simply ignoring the Court.
I’m afraid that this GOP Majority Court will fall victim to their 2nd Amendment absolutism. If so, it will precipitate Civil War II.
This makes me think of Aristotle's idea of "the watchmen".....and the accompanying concern about "who watches the watchmen?" I do think that the court has been overly politicized. It seems to me that this is one more governing "norm" in which Trump crossed the line and did not choose sufficiently experienced or moderate jurists. And, of course, McConnell played his part by blocking President Obama from installing Merrick Garland, or anyone, in 2016. With that said, I do agree with President Biden that packing the court would be a mistake. Because it could always be packed still further by a Republican administration (of course that could still happen anyway). The key, I think, is to win elections. There is no excuse for those who disagree with Trump and Trumpism and this Supreme Court not to come out to vote. Even if Joe Biden is not their first choice (and I actually think he has done a very good job considering the situation he inherited and the limitations of the current situation as well), the alternative is almost unthinkable. We got a preview of that from 2017-2021 and the sequel is certain to be worse given the learning curve that Trump is on. We might have had three progressive justices if not for "Bernie or bust" progressives who didn't see the difference between Hillary Clinton and Trump. So, there has to be an all out effort to win as many elections as possible. And then also to implement some reforms to the Supreme Court, especially addressing the conflict of interest issues that have arisen with Thomas and Alito. And perhaps a minimum experience level that must be met in the future as well. Thanks as always for your important and insightful posts, Steven!
Well said sir...you made several points that are important - we must win elections. Ordinary people must vote, at ever level. I too agree that the Biden Administration has been successful and got some good legislation passed, which Republicans who did not support it are all taking credit for before their constituents. I think Biden's foreign policy experience and experience in Congress have had a great deal to do with his success. "There is no excuse for those who disagree with Trump and Trumpism and this Supreme Court not to come out to vote."
Thanks, Laura, I agree with you 100%!
By god, now is the time to do really deep investigations of finances etc of all of the Justices.
The Court has been corrupted and contaminated for quite some time. To be "conservative" does NOT mean to be the oppressor. Yet, this Court has become increasingly poisoned by its penchant to embrace personal ideology and bias over objective and fair jurisprudence. That this Court actually ruled on a mythical case underscores how tainted this Court has become. Jurisprudence has given way to judicial bias; not judicial fairness and objectivity. With this contrived "case", the Court's "whatifism" has set the once-revered and respected institution onto a very dangerous path. That path is destructive by intention. Having just turned 79 years-old and a Veteran, I am in anguish over the plight of our country. The resident damage already done coupled with future such antics bodes a sinister and dark future for the United States. The arbiters of justice have co-authorized a "justice denied". Those arbitors of INjustice have become the siamese twin to the Republican Legislative Branch. A pall of darkness is draping itself across the land, a land cherished by ancestors and me. Where I once stood proud as very young USAF Sergeant, I now stand in dismay, disbelief and sorrow; AND, distrust.
Thank you for your service to this country. ♥️
This is most thoughtful. Thank you, back! My family has served our country since The American Revolutionary War, where my distant paternal grandfather fought with the Virginia 9th Regiment. Two uncles in WWII, older and younger brothers. I was Vietnam Era; classified Intel overseas; remote sites.
The six reprehensible ones may hide behind their robes and the trappings of office, but their words and actions expose them as the corrupt, unenlightened bigots that they are.
Why is anyone surprised that they ruled that the President’s plan to forgive student debt is “illegal?” The simple fact of the matter is that these judges are looking to ensure that education, like healthcare, is treated as an expensive commodity for sale. What better way to ensure that only the rich are well educated and healthy? Face it: the Republican agenda is to ensure that there is a barely literate workforce that is forever in hock and only capable of working in factories and fighting in wars.
The irony is that it is the very people who are hurt most by these fatwas who will turn out to vote for the fascists in droves. This must change.
Three words: we are fucked. All of the rights my grandparents (and my Boomer mother) fought for as Jim
Crow era civil rights activists decimated. I’m glad they are not here to grieve this like I am.
I am still here (age 82 now) and am distressed. I was a teacher and regularly wonder if we teachers were failures over 2-3 generations. How could we be behaving and voting as we do!
Dear Pat,
I’m so sorry you are also feeling defeated.
I too am an educator of 23 years, a former director of admissions at the University of Florida whose legacy work has also been upended. I have voted blue in what used to be a state that was purple and has since turned blood red. You didn’t do anything wrong. The country has taken a hard right. My mother, also a teacher, was born in the same decade as you and though she is no longer here, she and my grandmother would be horrified. I stand with you and all the teachers who dedicated their lives and careers to making the world a better place. I know how this feels and just know you have my support. Your contributions meant something and are appreciated. Take care and be well. 🙏
The systematic deconstruction of the Educational System is a direct cause of the current crisis.
💔💔💔
While I want to blame the court for so much I disagree with, I begrudgingly accept that wrong thinking is an eye-of-the-beholder thing. The two things that do wreck their credibility for me are 1. The unwillingness of Roberts to adopt any ethical standards as seen by unaddressed and unpunished blatant conflicts of interests, and 2. The irresponsible confirmation processes that a. Didn't consider Obama's nominee, and b. Made a vastly inadequate effort to properly vet Kavanaugh or Barrett.
Payback is hell and we will kick their assess in every election from here on out. The majority has had enough.
From your lips to voters’ ears... 🙏
The court has been both politicized and corrupted, and will remain so for as long as it is allowed to remain in its current lopsided state. Balance and ethics must be restored now. Why is Roberts “chief justice”? What is the point of a chief justice who does does not lead?
Politicization? Hell, this is against the very foundation of what this country was supposed to be. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address in 1863 said "“that these dead shall not have died in vain– that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” . WHERE is the government by and for the People? 61% of Americans approve of Abortion, yet they took away Roe v Wade. 54% of Americans think Affirmative Action is necessary in this racist country, but they took that away in schools. Employment will be next. Abolishing Contraception will be coming. These Fanatical Right wing SCOTUS Justices are out to make this country a theocracy, even a dictatorship. They vote how their Masters tell them to vote, and receive Monetary rewards for voting that way. It is time, Americans, to take this country BACK from the Right. WHY are we allowing 6 Radical Justices to put us back 100 yrs. VOTE BLUE, people, like your children and grandchildren depend on it.
I believe this is the most dangerous threat to our democracy. I am disgusted by the six conservative justices who were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote. Perhaps only presidents that win the popular vote should get to appoint justices.
They are:
Not Conservatives but 6 #SCExtremists
Totally corrupt & OWNED by GOP/RW billionaires
THE #1 clear & present danger to US Democracy
https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court
#SupremeCourtStench
#ExpandSCOTUS
Everything from the far right seems to be projection. For years they accused scotus of being filled with activist judges that were legislating from the bench. Now the federalist society has ensured that is exactly what we have.
In years past it doesn't seem like scotus would issue such narrow rulings. Student loan forgiveness being unconstitutional? What about the PPP? And all the business subsidies the federal govt has given over the years? Is it only unconstitutional when the beneficiaries are college students?
Where is the fine line between a business not serving a customer because of dress codes, unruliness, etc., and outright discrimination? What is the difference between not serving gay people and not serving black people during segregation? Did scotus just give Christians the right to discriminate against anyone? Or did they give anyone the right to anyone to discriminate against homosexuals? Or is it just that Christians are allowed to discriminate against homosexuals?
My 12-year-old interviewed Bunny, a trans woman, for a school project. Bunny said she doesn’t need CIS people to like her, she just wants the same Constitutional rights and protections that every other citizen has.
Republicans are attacking our LGBTQ+ citizens, relegating them to an inferior political status, a place where prejudiced people can cancel their equality in not just private settings, but also publicly funded ones. At what point will restaurants post signs saying “No Gays” and create separate water fountains? It’s awful, and we should all know better.
And why is this? Because Republican politicians believe homophobic Republican voters will turn out in droves in 2024 and return them to power. And, of course, they are right about the droves, let’s pray their wrong about returning to power.
e pluribus are divided, American citizen against American citizen, using hate, promoting discrimination of a politically vulnerable minority to gain power.
How can decent person vote for these awful politicians? For tax cuts? Really?
Tax cuts are merely a perk. The legal and social right to HATEis why they are voting GOP.
Sincerely, Kentucky resident.
I am feeling sad and angry in equal measure today. Just over a decade ago I felt such joy when the SCOTUS recognized my right to marry my wife. Now, the same institution with it's three new 'justices', put up by an illegitimate and criminal president, and the old ones, bought and paid for by leo Leonard's billionaire buds, is bent on removing our rights both as LGBT folk and as women. I wish we could remove the latest three but know that instead we must vote in every election for decent people in all open positions up and down the ballot. When majorities are held once again by people who believe in democracy and in settled law hopefully we will have the will to return the SCOTUS to a forward thinking constitution and law abiding body with the good will for the citizens uppermost in their judgements. Imagine.
In what way has the court usurped your rights if you are still legally married? What rights (allegedly) have been removed?
The reversal of Roe v Wade took away the faith in settled law based on previous SC decision that we had depended on for nearly 50 years.
Justice Thomas stated wish at the time of the Roe v Wade decision to revisit all decisions based on the 14th amendment in which he specifically mentioned same sex marriage among others. This is again placing a target on settled law and our marriage.
The recent case of the web designer who was concerned her business might have to create a site to celebrate a same sex marriage that changed Colorado's state law that was intended to protect the rights of all their citizens to be served by all businesses serving the public. This attacked a state's right to protect lgbtq people in any state. This makes us second class citizens again at the state level even in states that have worked hard to protect every one of their citizens. This gives one religion, one belief system, more significance than my existence and my rights.
If you don't understand it is because you do not want to understand.
The Supreme Court is the Real Coup. They left a deliberate opening in Moore v Harper”
I fear real axe is coming when they throw voting rights back to these Republican majority state legislatures to overthrow the will of the people. They will throw our Democracy away forever. All for money. All because of Citizens United. They have been bought big time. This is why they are so bold and so are all the Republicans…no platform, just removing rights one after another. The fix is in!
It feels like the pool table has been tilted violently to return the country to an earlier, less equal, and less diverse condition. Setting aside that it’s not ‘conservative’ but rather radical, the dangerous part is that it adds to general feelings of confusion, uncertainty, anger, and fear. All of which lays ample opportunity for a strongman-authoritarian who “can fix it all.” My small pushback is always reminding people to not just throw up our hands and marvel at it as spectators. Get in there - vote, of course, but also campaign for your candidate, volunteer in your community, attend speaking events and town halls. Show up! Especially if you’re a POC in a predominantly white area like me.
As an American living in Australia now I cringe each day turning on the news. The corrupt supreme court reveal their weaknesses daily. After accepting huge gifts from the billionaires who own them, they sit straight faced in their robes and turn the American social order back 60 years. Thomas has such a chip on his shoulder he is bent sideways and is still married to his very white supremacist wife who was proved to be in direct control and contact with Trump during the insurrection. Kavanaugh is a drunk. Alito seems to just be sadistic. WTAF?
Jackson is brilliant and we had hope.......
Beschloss comments will always side with Democrats so it's just a left point of view. The court is doing what it's supposed to do. Why must you politicize everything and everyone that you disagree with, just like dad and brother? Credibility? Hmmmm.
So, in the Dobbs case, the court was supposed to ignore stare decisis? And in the web designer case, the court was supposed to overlook the fact that there was no standing because no gay person ever sent the web designer an email requesting services (so there was also fraud). Google it.
The court was supposed to turn it to the states and court had nothing to do with their decisions. It's a moot point. Web designer speaks of a hypotethical situation (clearly explained) remember the cake people issue and wanted to clarify her rules. Like when restaurants say, "no shirt, no service" a business owner should be able to say yes or no to a job.
Judge Luttig would firmly disagree with you too.
The logic for their rulings is tortured & at least two of them are guilty of ethics violations, for which I would have been kicked off the bench and disbarred.
Oh, come on, it's clearly all backed up in their decisions as written. What ethics do you think have been violated? More left anger because it didn't go the way you "thought" it should?
I could have been reprimanded, if not removed from office, for selling my daughter’s Girl Scout cookies or school fundraiser raffle tickets due to “appearance of impropriety” if any attorneys who may be in my court in the future might try to “get on my good side” by buying cookies or raffle tickets (neither of which actually benefit me).
The fact that two of the Justices have received tens of thousands of unsolicited gifts (and failed to correctly disclose them until caught) is a huge ethics red flag. Regardless of whether or not SCOTUS has actual ethics rules, the rules of the legal profession ban such conduct. As does our Oath to preserve and protect the Constitution.
In editing, my comment got removed. To paraphrase; I understand your point of view, my husband was a CEO, decided not to take gifts for that reason. However, there is no such rule in place for the court but is likely one soon will be. It's a slippery slope because who can say who our friends are? Failure to correctly disclose them is not accurate according to what I have read several different places.
There are ethics rules for lawyers regardless of the lack of ethics rules for SCOTUS. It’s beyond the pale to think that once one receives the highest lifetime appointment the basic ethics rules no longer apply. We must be beyond reproach. Stunning.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3949237-thomas-failed-to-disclose-real-estate-deal-with-gop-donor-who-also-paid-for-lavish-trips-report/
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579
https://www.propublica.org/article/samuel-alito-luxury-fishing-trip-paul-singer-scotus-supreme-court
It’s incredibly sad that you’re blind to what’s happening with the Supreme Court. The “right” leaning justices have upended decades of precedent & given all kinds of ass backward reasoning for their decisions- cases that were brought before them for exacty that purpose, by the same Christian nationalist groups that clearly own clowns like Alito & Thomas. It’s not “left anger” sunshine, it’s the fury of a majority having their rights stripped by a clique of hypocritical religious zealots appointed by a president that lost the popular vote
Disagree, Vicki!
Disagree on what premise?
When a court makes a decision without anyone having standing as in the website creator's suit, should send a chill down everyone's back. There's no need for standing, just file an action and a right-wing group will fund the case through the courts. WOW! Wouldn't a lot of us who may have been wronged by a group, corporation or a person love to be able to have the resources to file a suit and have it race to the head of the line through finding an agreeable judge and all the other necessary tactics, and then have the SCOTUS say, "Screw you, America. We have God on our side, so f...you!" This is being done by the evangelicals and right-wing troupes with the resources to thumb their noses at a system that was not designed for such antics. The three Trump judges who lied to the Senate to get their seats are thumbing their noses at the country and the world. When Biden wins in 2024, in 2025 he should make sure that the SCOTUS is revamped with at least five new justices along with set terms. Of course, this means winning the Senate. That must be the goal, then, mustn't it?
The revanchist move backwards is a certain dystopian future.
So much education and so little wisdom. I no longer have respect for SCOTUS.
I feel fairly certain some type of schedule could be worked out with addition of justices and retirement of justices. Do this on a rolling basis, if you have 16 years on the court, you are retired. And those achieving 16 years also are retired. The four new justices with simply take over this position on the court. The even number, criticism? PI don’t really consider that a big deal since they worked for almost a year after McConnell’s failure to bring Mr. Garland up for a vote and we had an 8 Member Court.
I lean more conservative, but I am appalled at the way SCOTUS creates legislation, instead of the judicial review Marshall began and Taney championed. Justices should be above political parties, above lobbying, above personal beliefs. If you decide a court case based upon your own paradigm, than you have failed. SCOTUS is a balancing branch that makes sure the legislative body creates laws the affect the body politic equally, and effectively, while keeping the executive branch the leader of our representative democracy. They shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily overturn laws due to religious beliefs or preconceptions. They shouldn't prevent the president from being, well the president. They shouldn't support an executive who thinks he's a one man show; they shouldn't defend laws that keep a minority (read: cis, old, white men) in power. If you cannot be objective, you shouldn't become a judge - in any capacity. There will be some conceptions they bring in, because we're all human, and no one is perfect. You will have some biases, but you shouldn't be ruled by them. We can't expect previous experience - law school, clerking, private practice, previous positions - to be wiped away. In fact, a blank template justice would be a terrible thing! There is a legitimate need for experience. It's just that that experience shouldn't be gained at the expense of the many for the reward of the few.
In GA, we elect all our judges; I wonder what would happen if we went back to state legislatures appointing Senators, but voted for our SCOTUS? All congressman need term limits; we need better ways to impeach our leaders, without it becoming a circus. When men like Thomas can serve for what seems like a century and women like Ginsburg force themselves to the physical brink because they're terrified of what will happen to people when they die - we need to amend our laws. The Constitution was written for a different century, hell, a different millennium! We need to gut and repair, instead of patching holes and white washing. White, wealthy men created it so white, wealthy men would remain so. It may be a living document, but it's got cataracts and emphysema.
We’ve seen reason aplenty of late to conclude that the process by which SCOTUS justices are selected is defective, as are the terms of the deal (lifetime appointments with virtually no strings, restraints, oversight, or guiding leadership influence.) In short, the court is badly broken, the net result being that its decisions are no longer trusted or respected, let alone looked up to. As a start, following are some potential changes to consider:
1. Instead of lifetime appointments, justices should be appointed to staggered, renewable, 6-year terms, with a maximum service period of 20 years (allowing for brief overlap in the event of unexpected “retirement” of a justice.)
2. SCOTUS nominations will be made by a panel consisting of the Senate Minority and Majority leaders, and the incumbent Chief Justice, with nominations approved by vote of the entire senate.
3. The existing pipeline for SCOTUS justice candidates should be widened considerably.
4. But for their personal residence and attendant belongings, employees of the Court (including justices) may have no investible assets with aggregate value in excess of $1/2 million outside of a blind trust.
5. Any mmember of the SCOTUS may be removed from duty (for cause) by the Chief Justice, with disposition of the matter resolved by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The court has changed numbers 6 times in the past. If more are added, only to make it more like the Democrats, why wouldn't Republicans do the same next time in power? It needs input from both so all people are represented. The 1st court had 6 members, with problems-Jay because of his treaty with Britain, Wilson sent to prison for bad debts, Rutledge who tried suicide, Harrison died. Blair ok, house where Truman stayed while White House renovated and where his assassination attempted. When I was in high school, we knew the names of all the justices. Who could forget a name like Felix Frankfurter? There has always been controversy over Court members and decisions. The 13th, 14th amendments did not help civil rights. Lynchings continued as did segregation in schools, busses, lunch counters and even drinking fountains. Court agreed.
States determine school subjects. Concentration for years has been on achieving higher scores in math and English language., History gone by the wayside, many teachers, themselves raised this way now unknowledgeable about history's truths.Same goes for young parents who now raise voices at school board meetings demanding to determine what their children are taught. Well, fact is, 1 in 3 couldn't pass a citizenship test; 22% cannot name the 3 branches of gov't. Those who watched We Are Marshall have no idea who Marshall was. A man living in Polk County, FL had no idea Polk was a president. With my little retirement job in a grocery store, I keep asking people when they pay or get change, who is on that $100 bill, $50 bill? No one ever knows. They know Mick Jagger is selling his house. So, who is really concerned about Court decisions?
Only 7.1% of Americans are trans or gay.Women care; fed up with Republican and Court decisions against them,I think the abortion issue will be a big factor in upcoming elections.College students with debts . Being a Democrat, a party that allows diverse thinking, I disagree with paying off those debts. Time should be paid getting schools to lower admission costs, banks to lower interest rates. $70K+ yearly rates are unconscionable. There should be more scholarships, grants plus people need to receive bigger paychecks from greedy companies. A man working as a car mechanic should not have to pay for one majoring in medicine who will go on to earn much more than the mechanic who got him there.
It does no good to just repeat what is happening in the Court and Congress.Those of us who care already know. It is a solution that needs to be addressed for the problems of today. I will always believe,
it is improved public education which in turn decides how a person votes and the future of this country.
It’s too late to worry about politicization of the SCOTUS, it’s obviously happened. The question remains, just WTF 🤬 are Democrats going to do about it.
Who am I? Who are you? In this country we are still allowed to have our own opinions. The view in America is not to kill someone. There's your rub. It's against the law. All women DO have access to birth control today. I am not going to get into the many ways. It IS available and so are condoms at the drugstore. Were this pre-1960 and the advent of birth control pills, it would be a different story. Taking a life is a crime. Next you will want to choose who you think should live or die in this world. Any sense of decency knows society does NOT condone killing a life. I am sure you are one of those people who believes in PETA but doesn't give the same right to the human species.
Of course anyone with the conditions you mentioned will be treated by their doctor to "save the life of the mother". Don't think your snide remarks affect me whatsoever, it just shows me who YOU are. The view of society is you don't kill another person and a fertilized sperm IS a person whether you want to admit it or not. Nature will take its course, some will live and some will abort and others will need medical intervention as mentioned above. If you have an emergency surgery needed, a hospital will give it to you as lifesaving. Using abortion as birth control is not taking responsibility for your actions. I do not want MY tax money going to fix your lack of responsibility. Of course there always has to be a racial component in every attack today. Get over that. It's propaganda. You reap what you sow. Do the right thing and your life will be as good as anyone else. Life is NOT fair, you know. Life is not perfect. Think about that. Whining about what you are not getting for ME ME ME is not how it works. You have a great life and be responsible in all that you do. Then you will be a happy person.
You say that SCOTUS has been “tainted by the poison of politics and the ideological fervor of a conservative supermajority.”
I am not sure that’s correct. While three of them are on the court thanks to trump, did he ever really have a “supermajority,” 66 Senators? I think we are being controlled--with the present SCOTUS’s help--by *minority* rule, which has been the long term plan by a minority of white men.
And yes, absolutely, the SCOTUS at this point in time is illegitimate, makes unconstitutional decisions, and has the trustworthiness of a murder of crows (as in a group of crows being an omen of death).
Remedies are possible.
1. Subject SCOTUS to voters since they make political decisions.
2. Ethics rules with mandated recusals.
3. Term limits
4. Forced retirement age. 72 perhaps?
5. Increase the bench to 13.
6. Impeachment for ethics rules break.
None of those things will occur while McCarthy holds the gavel. But when we win back the house, SCOTUS must be a priority of the first order.
SCOTUS should be renamed
“The Ministry of Social Policy and Übermensch Branch of the United States.” It’s a more accurate description.
Everyone requires checks and balances. Without that, the human mind plays a game of chicken based on
it's perceived odds of being caught and the seriousness of the transgression. Prefabricated excuses are at the ready, just in case. Allowing a lifetime position is ludicrous just for this reason. Mankind is not based on honesty and integrity without consequences. The three newest members had already lied to be confirmed. They should have been expelled the moment their views changed. That should have been a wake up call. Our nation is in such turmoil and these infractions go free without consequence. Summonses ignored, theft of PPL loans, lying under oath. NO ONE SHOULD BE APPOINTED TO A LIFETIME POSITION. Humans are not that honest.
Steven, you have a unique ability to cut through the noise and chaos to shine a light on the most important issues we face. To answer your question of how dangerous is this...in my opinion, maybe the most dangerous. This small group of people have the ability to shape the values and laws that all Americans will live by. Is it even realistic to think that humans are even capable of doing it in an impartial way? I welcome this debate because the future existence of our country depends on it.
Clearly, the current Court is not representative of American society of the day. The recent decisions show an eagerness to promote conservatism that is at odds with judicial impartiality in its one-sidedness. Overturning Roe disregarded stare decisis and finding in favor in the right to discriminate is clearly ideological, favoring reactionary forces. In another case, the right of government agencies, like the EPA, to set policy was curtailed. This damages the US government’s credibility, both nationally and internationally. And there are more examples of this Court expanding its power at the cost of its neutral status.
The solution must be to institute term limits for the Justices, so that the Court better reflects the society it is supposed to serve. Ethical rules should also be set and strictly adhered to.
At the heart of the issue is public trust of the institution. When trust is eroded, society as a whole loses. Such trust takes a long time to build back up, during which time the Nation becomes vulnerable to extremist influences.
I listen to a podcast called Sister In Law - excellent and highly recommended. They suggest that the curtailing of the EPA, and many of these ridiculous rulings, are a way for SCOTUS to follow the far right agenda of limiting government and shrinking it. By curtailing the agencies to where they can’t do their jobs, they hope to reduce the administrative government. Seems like a reasonable assumption in light of the EPA and the FDA rulings we’re seeing from other Federalist Society judges (mifepristone for instance).
Yes, it’s scary to see these reactionary tendencies (old White men, mostly) still holding sway.
We get what we vote for, so in the end we need to educate, motivate and help all citizens to vote. Tall order, but democracy depends on it!
Why are we ( am I) not at all surprised the author likes the left rebuttals. Does that not prove my point?
It is a Robber court! It has robbed the Supreme Court of Ethics, it has robbed the protections for voters, it has robbed America of equal protection under the law, it has robbed America of the ability to protect our waters and air, it has robbed American women of rights over their body, it has robbed our trust in election information with Citizens Inited, it has robbed our Chief executive of his ability to assist students in need. This is not a Robert’s court it is a robber court fleecing Americans of rights.
Always dangerous no matter what side you are on. But somehow don’t remember liberal justices doing so to the point of truly ignoring the Constitution.
The fact that the modern GOP controls SCOTUS is the result of a 50+ year strategy to control appointments. McConnell has been a master at using his power to appoint right wing zealots to judgeships across the country. The only way to win back the Court is by a similar strategy, aimed at one judge at a time. The number of judges will not be increased with a divided Congress; term limits won’t be imposed when the GOP controls governments in so many states; Alito and Thomas won’t be impeached with the GOP controlling the House. The only solution--the ONLY solution--is to organize and win seats, district by district, state by state. It will take lots of money, so make political donations wisely, frequently, and with the urgency today’s America demands.
So, what do you think is supposed to happen when the President encroaches on the constitutional power of Congress? Who else can settle that but the courts? Doesn't seem like a high crime or misdemeanor. And what if Congress should encroach on the constitutional power of the presidency?
This is how democracy ends. Full stop. They act as though they are above the law.
I believe that when it comes to the politicization of the Extreme Court, that ship sailed long ago. The fact that we are now aware not just of the liars and incompetent who were placed by Trump, but by the corrupt billionaire lackeys already in place, it’s time to burn the whole thing down. Increase the size and put in term limits.
We can all see how dangerous this court is. Term limits need to be applied. Several have mentioned rotating justices. And definitely a code of ethics needs to be established. Kavanaugh should never have been permitted to be appointed. Thomas should be impeached. But none of this will happen and they will continue to erode the rights of women, persons of color and all marginalized groups. Disgusting.
Any elected official should also have term limits. Kavanaugh and Thomas are fine. Women's rights are not eroded, they have a choice. This is not 1950. Rights are not being eroded. People are eroding themselves by not doing what it takes to get a head. Choices are made watching the media, internet and cell phones. Common sense and the Golden Rule would be a good place for anyone with any brains to start with and maybe adding to society instead of constantly whining, griping and wanting more for themselves. Disgusting what society has turned into in my lifetime.
The U.S. government isn't for the people and never was. The leaders, both elected and unelected, serve the interests of the ownership class all the way back to the Founding Fathers. What's good for the People only matters when it serves the larger interests of the corporations. In recent years that basic fact has become too obvious to ignore. The United Corporations of America is where you live and you have two choices before you if you aren't happy about it: defect to another country that actually has a democracy or join the Revolution.
How dangerous? Here’s my warning: https://substack.com/@chandrahardy/note/c-17996924?r=nlxz5&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
Yes this Court is dangerous.
But sadly nothing will be done about it.
The country is going to devolve into an ugly civil war and this court will likely be the catalyst for the conflagration to begin.
God help us.
VERY !!!