The Supreme Court is delusional
Over the weekend, two Supreme Court justices — one from the right, one from the left — made the case that their institution is and should remain a place largely free from politics. In both cases, the comments were hard to swallow.
The court's justices are not a "bunch of partisan hacks," Justice Amy Coney Barrett said Sunday at the University of Louisville. "To say the court's reasoning is flawed is different from saying the court is acting in a partisan manner," she told the audience, insisting that differing judicial philosophies are not the same thing as partisan stances. "I think we need to evaluate what the court is doing on its own terms."
Meanwhile, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer gave a weekend interview to Fox News, in which he cautioned against progressive proposals to pack the court. "On the surface, it seems to me you start changing all these things around and people will lose trust in the court," he told the network.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
There are reasons to be skeptical. Barrett, for example, gave her speech at Louisville's McConnell Center — named for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who rushed to secure her confirmation during election season after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg last fall. McConnell even introduced Barrett's speech Sunday. In that context, Barrett's speech was the political equivalent of a Super Bowl championship parade for the minority leader. It certainly didn't appear to be above the political fray.
Breyer's comments, meanwhile, elided the degree to which many Americans have already lost trust in the court — in part because of the perception that Republicans started "changing all these things around" on the court by denying Democratic nominee Merrick Garland a confirmation hearing in 2016.
By virtue of their lifetime appointments, the court's justices are insulated from the daily battle of politics. But they work in an inescapably political context, chosen for the court not because of their airy musings about "judicial philosophies" but because presidents reasonably believe those philosophies align with their own partisan priorities. Sometimes, the justices' work is even plainly partisan: Who can forget Bush v. Gore, or the court's more recent voting rights decisions? The court isn't above politics — instead, it practices politics with an eye on the long game.
Sometimes you have to wonder if Supreme Court justices believe what they're selling America, or if they're just self-deluded.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a freelance writer who has spent nine years as a syndicated columnist, co-writing the RedBlueAmerica column as the liberal half of a point-counterpoint duo. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic, The Kansas City Star and Heatmap News. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
'Florida's abortion law leads to "chaos"'
Today's Newspapers A roundup of the headlines from the US front pages
By The Week Staff Published
-
Our growing taste for bubble tea
The Week Recommends The trend for boba-based beverages shows no sign of ending
By Adrienne Wyper, The Week UK Published
-
How to enjoy the Proms 2024
The Week Recommends This year's concert highlights, how to buy tickets, and where to watch and listen
By Adrienne Wyper, The Week UK Published
-
Net neutrality is back. And so is the battle over it.
Talking Point Old internet rules are being reinstated, but the internet has changed since last time
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
'Presidential debates are more performance art than actual ways to inform'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
Russia gains as Ukraine awaits US aid
Speed Read Ukrainian forces have retreated from several villages as the situation at the front line worsens
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
'Horror stories of women having to carry nonviable fetuses'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
Haiti interim council, prime minister sworn in
Speed Read Prime Minister Ariel Henry resigns amid surging gang violence
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
'Elevating Earth Day into a national holiday is not radical — it's practical'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
Is the Supreme Court about to criminalize homelessness?
Talking Points The court will decide if bans on outdoor camping are 'cruel and unusual'
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Myanmar: the Spring Revolution and the downfall of the generals
Talking Point An armed protest movement has swept across the country since the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi was overthrown in 2021
By The Week Staff Published