"Slate's Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern are joined by Vox's Ian Millhiser to discuss the upcoming Supreme Court term, which officially starts on Monday. The term begins with a slew of wildly significant cases that feel all but decided in the Trump administration's favor already. That feeling of inevitability could perhaps be ascribed to the ongoing assault on democracy coming from the high court's shadow docket, which will now spill over into cases argued on the merits."
"Dahlia, Mark, and Ian examine the effect of all this sloppy law on the public's perception of the court, and look ahead to upcoming cases on voting rights, campaign finance, conversion therapy, transgender rights, tariffs, and presidential power. They explore how the court's decisions reflect a shift towards a more partisan and less transparent judicial process, and ask whether there's any hope of restoring the rule of law and healthy constitutional democracy in the future."
The Supreme Court's upcoming term begins with numerous consequential cases that appear likely to benefit the Trump administration. The court's shadow docket has produced rulings that convey inevitability and will influence merits decisions. Cases scheduled include disputes over voting rights, campaign finance, conversion therapy bans, transgender rights, tariffs, and presidential authority. Recent decisions reflect a shift toward partisanship and reduced transparency in the judicial process. Public confidence in the court risks erosion as legal reasoning becomes perceived as sloppy or politically driven. The future of the rule of law and constitutional democracy faces significant uncertainty.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]