(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



The Robber’s Court: How the Supreme Court Betrayed America [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']

Date: 2025-04-12

The U.S. Supreme Court is often called the Roberts Court after Chief Justice John Roberts. But that label is increasingly a misnomer. Roberts may hold the title, but he no longer wields meaningful influence. When the Court maintained a 5–4 ideological split, Roberts could serve as a swing vote, tempering rulings and preserving the Court’s legitimacy. Now, with a 6–3 conservative supermajority, the true power has shifted to its most ideological flank—Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Both are extreme in their political orientation and activism. Thomas is ethically compromised beyond redemption, and Alito is not far behind. Gorsuch, too, is tainted. The problem isn’t just the numerical shift—it’s the quality and integrity of the majority.

A 5–4 Court encourages careful legal reasoning and compromise. A 6–3 majority, on the other hand, can bulldoze over nuance and dissent.If Anthony Kennedy was still on the court, the Court would be less ideological due to a respect for precedent, ethical grounding, and flexibility resulting in swing votes. Instead, the current Court is marked by ideological activism and ethical scandals. While Roberts has spoken against judicial impeachments, Clarence Thomas should be removed from the bench.

Remarkably, public approval of the Supreme Court has increased—from 39% in May 2024 to 51% in February 2025, according to the Marquette Law School Poll. (Source: https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2025/02/13/). That jump may reflect a fragile hope that the Court will shield Americans from Donald Trump’s authoritarian impulses. This hope is likley misplaced. That said, the Court still enjoys higher approval than either Trump or Congress.

However, the April 10, 2025, ruling in theKilmar Abrego Garcia case reveals the on going erosion of judicial standards. In that case, the Court ruled on a narrow question of statutory interpretation—choosing the word “facilitate” over “effectuate.” The difference, though subtle, carries real legal consequences. “Facilitate” implies indirect involvement, while “effectuate” implies direct execution. Or in the vernacular, Facilitate is like asking, “Oh please with sugar on top,” while effectuate is more like, “Do it, damnit.” To get a unanimous order, Roberts went all vanilla in the ruling, but a response by Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan and Justice Jackson, outlines the many legal failures of the government. (Source: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a949_lkhn.pdf)

The case originated with Judge Paula Xinis of the U.S. District Court in Maryland, who later amended her ruling to align with the Supreme Court’s language. Robert’s order asked the lower Court to act “with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” Given the outrageous behavior of the government in this case, Judge Xinis may doubt that deference is owed but still must act with decorum. Yet the Department of Justice continues to contort itself to resist oversight. When Xinis demanded updates on the case, the DOJ’s lawyer played dumb, echoing the infamous “I know nothing” refrain of Sergeant Schultz from the mid-1960s televison series Hogan’s Heroes. Xinis, undeterred, has ordered daily updates.

This moment confirms what many fear: the Roberts Court has morphed into the Robber’s Court—a court that robs Americans of rights, protections, and trust while instilling fear. Here’s how:

1. Robbing Precedent: Conservative justices claimed during confirmation that they respected precedent (stare decisis, which is Latin for “to stand by things decided”), but their actions—most notably in overturning Roe v. Wade and the Chevron doctrine—reveal otherwise. This undermines legal stability and public confidence.

2. Robbing Judicial Neutrality: Once a model of restraint, the Court now acts as an activist, ideological body. Its expanded use of the shadow docket allows major changes to the law without full briefing or oral argument. Some justices even advise litigants during oral arguments or dissents on how to reshape future cases.

3. Robbing the Balance of Power: The Court increasingly refuses to check executive power. As Trump flouts legal norms and court orders, the Court looks the other way. With Congress paralyzed or complicit, this abdication of duty is dangerous. Dissenting justices have pointed out again and again the danger this poses to democracy.

4. Robbing Accountability: The Court picks and chooses its docke tin ways that advance an activist, ideological agenda while avoiding urgent constitutional questions. Combined with the shadow docket, this undermine stransparency and legal clarity.

5. Robbing Public Confidence: Ethical scandals—like justices accepting luxury gifts from wealthy individuals with business before the Court—have eroded trust. Unlike lower federal courts, the Supreme Court has no enforceable code of ethics. This is indefensible, making it hard to take the Court seriously.

6. Robbing the Constitution’s Promise: From gutting the Voting Rights Act to favoring corporate interests over workers, unions, consumers, and the environment, the Court has sided with power and wealth and against democratic and economic equity. Citizens United equated money with speech and corporations with people—an affront to constitutional logic.

7. Robbing Judicial Philosophy: The conservative justices preach originalism and textualism but abandon those principles when inconvenient. The current majority seems focused on outcomes, not legal reasoning. Power, not principle, now governs.

8. Robbing Democracy in Real Time: By delaying rulings on presidential overreach and executive immunity, the Court becomes complicit in democratic erosion. At a time of crisis, passivity is perilous. Judicial restraint has become judicial abandonment.

Having become the Robber’s Court, the Robert’s Court is an embarrassment. Roberts supposedly has been committed to institutional stability, judicial restraint, respecting precedent, and narrow rulings, but the other conservatives on the Court seem not to share his values.

The Robber’s Court is not just a critique—it is a warning. The Supreme Court, once seen as the guardian of constitutional order, has become a vehicle for ideological imposition and political favoritism. Rather than checking authoritarianism, it is enabling it. The Robber’s Court is aiding the Trump Administration in the theft of the fundamental rights accorded to the people in this country, both citizens and non-citizens.

Chief Justice Roberts may still hold the gavel, but he no longer holds the reins. Until the Court recommits to ethics, precedent, neutrality, and democratic accountability, it will remain not the Roberts Court but the Robber’s Court—and history will remember it as such.

Day 82: days left to January 20, 2029: 1,379 days

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/4/12/2316071/-The-Robber-s-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Betrayed-America?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.