Who Needs Democracy When They Can Have a Runaway Supreme Court Instead

How SCOTUS' Power Grabs Are Undermining American Democracy

In a stunning display of judicial overreach, the United States Supreme Court has positioned itself as the ultimate arbiter of American democracy, effectively saying, "Who needs democracy when you have us?"

This alarming consolidation of power threatens the very foundations of our democratic system, as the Court increasingly undermines other branches of government and sidelines the will of the people.

The Erosion of Public Trust

The Supreme Court's recent actions have not gone unnoticed by the American public.

Approval ratings for the Court have plummeted to near-historic lows, reflecting a growing distrust in its ability to interpret the law impartially.

This erosion of public trust is not merely a matter of disagreement with individual rulings; it strikes at the heart of the Court's perceived legitimacy and its role in our democratic system.

The partisan divide in the perception of the Court has never been starker.

While Republicans largely approve of the Court's recent decisions, Democrats overwhelmingly disapprove. This highlights the growing view of the Court as a political entity rather than an impartial arbiter of justice.

This ideological split undermines the Court's ability to function as a respected institution above the fray of partisan politics.

The Court's Consolidation of Power

Under the guise of judicial review, the Supreme Court has embarked on a systematic campaign to consolidate power within its chambers, effectively neutering Congress, paralyzing federal agencies, and sidelining lower courts.

This power grab is not subtle; it's a brazen attempt to rewrite the Constitution and reshape American governance according to the ideological preferences of its conservative majority.

Neutering Congress

The Court has attacked Congress's ability to legislate on modern issues, effectively freezing legislative authority on matters resembling 18th-century grievances.

In cases like TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Court has restricted Congress's power to create new rights, arguing that such actions infringe on the judiciary's domain.

This judicial overreach not only undermines the separation of powers but also hamstrings our elected representatives' ability to address contemporary challenges.

Paralyzing Federal Agencies

The Court has dealt a severe blow to the functioning of federal agencies by inventing the "major questions doctrine," as seen in West Virginia v. EPA. 

This doctrine requires explicit congressional approval for significant agency actions, effectively obstructing governance and regulatory efforts.

By overruling the long-standing Chevron deference, the Court has further diminished agencies' ability to interpret and implement statutes, centralized power within its own chambers.

Sidelining Lower Courts

The Supreme Court's increased use of the shadow docket is a particularly insidious method of consolidating power.

The Court bypasses traditional judicial procedures and effectively micromanages lower courts by issuing sweeping rulings without full arguments or transparency.

This practice undermines the integrity of the judicial process and allows the Court to shape policy without the scrutiny of its regular docket.

Case Studies of Judicial Overreach

The Court's recent decisions provide a litany of examples demonstrating its willingness to override democratic processes and impose its ideological preferences on the nation.

The Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, not only eliminated a long-standing constitutional right but also flew in the face of public opinion, with a majority of Americans believing abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

Similarly, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, the Court invalidated gun safety regulations, overriding state authority and ignoring the will of local communities.

These decisions, along with others like West Virginia v. EPA and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, showcase a Court more interested in advancing a conservative agenda than upholding democratic principles or respecting precedent.

The Threat to Democracy

The Supreme Court's actions represent a clear and present danger to American democracy.

By centralizing power in an unelected body, the Court undermines the balance of power among branches of government and erodes the principle of democratic accountability.

The Court's selective empowerment of states based on ideological alignment further demonstrates its willingness to manipulate the federal system to achieve desired outcomes.

Chief Justice John Roberts's plea for civility in the face of public criticism is nothing more than a smokescreen to shield the Court from much-needed scrutiny and accountability.

The reality is that public outrage and criticism are not only justified but necessary to counter the Court's abandonment of judicial restraint and respect for democratic governance.

The Need for Accountability and Reform

As the Supreme Court continues its power grab, the need for reform becomes increasingly urgent. Proposals such as term limits for justices, court expansion, and implementing a binding code of conduct must be seriously considered.

These reforms aim to restore balance to the judiciary and ensure that it serves the broader interests of democracy rather than the narrow ideological agenda of its current majority.

The American people must remain vigilant and vocal in their criticism of the Court's overreach. An informed and engaged citizenry is our best defense against the erosion of democratic principles.

We must demand transparency, accountability, and a return to a Court that respects the will of the people and the constitutional separation of powers.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's recent actions have made it clear that it views itself not as a co-equal branch of government but as the supreme arbiter of American life.

We must ask ourselves not, "Who needs democracy when they can have a runaway Supreme Court instead?" but rather, "How can we reclaim our democracy from an institution that has lost its way?"

The answer lies in our collective willingness to challenge the Court's overreach, demand reform, and reaffirm the principles of democratic governance that have long been the bedrock of our nation.

Enjoying the insights?
Help keep the content flowing—subscribe for free or become a paid supporter of independent journalism and receive exclusive weekly eBooks and monthly Audio/Video Books!

No matter how you choose to support this work, I’m grateful to have you here.

Thank you for reading,

Stay strong,

samuel