"I think that's where the Justices have shown the most inclination to vote in ways that might be inconsistent as a matter of legal principle, but consistent as a matter of partisan political preference. The shadow docket represents a mechanism through which the Court can exercise significant power while potentially prioritizing political alignment over rigorous legal analysis and constitutional interpretation."
The Supreme Court's rebuke of President Trump's tariff policy masks a broader pattern of expanding executive power through emergency shadow docket rulings. These shadow docket decisions serve as shortcuts for handling urgent requests but may prioritize partisan political preferences over consistent legal principles. Stephen Vladeck, a Georgetown Law professor, identifies this inconsistency as a significant concern, suggesting the Court's justices vote in ways that appear legally inconsistent but align with partisan interests. The shadow docket mechanism enables the Court to exercise substantial power while operating outside traditional deliberative processes, raising questions about judicial accountability and the balance of governmental powers.
#supreme-court-shadow-docket #executive-power-expansion #trump-defiance-of-courts #judicial-partisanship #emergency-rulings
Read at The New Yorker
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]