john roberts

Rulings issued by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) increasingly appear to be ideologically driven, often splitting along a clear conservative-liberal divide—whether 5–4 when there were five conservative justices, or 6–3 following the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her replacement by the more conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by President Trump. The relatively recent  Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health ruling in June 2022, where the conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade by a 6-3 split, underscores this point.

This pattern of partisan alignment contributes to a broader fear, especially in the wake of President Trump’s reelection, that America’s bulwarks of democracy are buckling. From attacks on civil rights, universities, and the press, to a Justice Department willing to arrest sitting judges, Trump’s actions seem designed to destabilize core institutions. At the same time, his roughshod approach to “justice” is almost cynically expected to end up in the courts—particularly at SCOTUS—where many assume the ruling will go his way. The common narrative in progressive circles warns that the Court, stacked with Trump appointees, will support him in any unconstitutional attempt to hold power. While we have no quibble about their assessment that President Trump is a bad hombre who will do his best to do his worst, we are not convinced that SCOTUS will ever do his bidding. And though three of its justices were appointed by Trump and others often align ideologically, SCOTUS has shown itself, at times, to resist political pressure. It may still serve as a vital check on executive overreach. Whether it can fulfill that role is a question worth answering not just with alarm, but with close attention to facts and patterns. But first, some context and examples.