Leah, Kate, and Melissa join Chris Hayes to discuss the drama of the last Supreme Court term, including striking down affirmative action, issuing opinions in the 303 Creative case, and invalidating the Biden administration's student debt relief program. They also address recent allegations of ethical improprieties of SCOTUS justices and the ongoing effort to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Read more
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
auto_awesome
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
The Supreme Court's increasing power undermines the decisions of Congress and agencies, revealing a lack of humility and a disregard for the democratic process.
The Court's judicial activism and reinterpretation of precedents undermines democracy and elected officials' role in policy decisions.
Recent scrutiny of the Supreme Court justices' financial activities raises ethical concerns and compromises the Court's credibility and legitimacy.
Deep dives
The Court's Power Grab
The Supreme Court has been amassing more and more power, asserting authority over issues of major significance and undermining the decisions of Congress and administrative agencies. This is evident in cases such as the major questions doctrine, which allows the Court to second-guess agency authority, and cases that reorder principles of equality and dignity. The Court's hubris is further demonstrated by their arrogant approach to precedent and their willingness to redefine past cases to fit their own agenda. Their actions reveal a lack of humility and a disregard for the democratic process, seeking to make decisions on controversial issues that should be left to elected officials.
The Problem with Judicial Activism
The Court's decisions often demonstrate a lack of restraint and a tendency towards judicial activism. They seem more interested in pushing their own ideological agenda than in impartially interpreting the law. This is evident in cases like the affirmative action and 303 creative cases, where the Court reinterprets past precedents to suit their own beliefs. The Court's activism undermines the democratic process and the role of other institutions, such as Congress and administrative agencies, in making policy decisions. Instead, the Court should focus on robustly protecting democracy, facilitating self-governance, and respecting the decisions made by elected officials.
The Court's Ethical Quandaries
Recent scrutiny of the financial activities of the Supreme Court justices reveals serious ethical concerns. The acceptance of gifts and favors, such as private jets and luxury vacations, from individuals who may have matters before the Court raises questions about the judgment and integrity of the justices. These actions demonstrate a lack of understanding of ethical boundaries and a disregard for the perception of impartiality and fairness. The Court's credibility and legitimacy are compromised when its members engage in such behavior. There is a need for greater transparency and accountability to ensure the integrity of the highest court in the land.
The Need for Judicial Humility
The Supreme Court is in dire need of humility in its decisions and actions. The Court's arrogance is evident in its willingness to overturn settled precedents and redefine them to fit their own ideology. They should recognize the limits of their position and acknowledge that their role is to interpret the law, not to make it. Instead of asserting more power for themselves, the Court should focus on protecting democracy and facilitating meaningful participation in a democratic society. This requires respecting the decisions of elected officials and limiting their interference in policy matters. Humility and restraint are crucial for the Court to maintain its credibility and fulfill its role in the democratic system.
Influence and Access Campaigns
The podcast highlights the revelations about an influence and access campaign aimed at getting close to conservative justices. This campaign involved matching up justices and their spouses with conservative donors to build friendships and gain influence. The podcast emphasizes that this campaign is actively working to capture the court and raises concerns about the court's corruption cases when purchasing access to government officials is not considered corruption. The podcast argues for increased accountability and public critique to address these issues.
Long-Term Efforts and Structural Solutions
The podcast discusses the need for sustained focus and attention on the Supreme Court and its decision-making. It draws parallels with the 100-year struggle of the temperance movement and suggests that the fight for abortion rights may similarly require a long-term effort. The podcast advocates for directed criticism at elected officials to recognize the court's role in their decision-making and to push for structural solutions beyond short-term outrage. It also stresses the importance of education and mobilization to impact the court indirectly through Democratic checks and changes in state legislatures.
Leah, Kate, and Melissa join MSNBC's Chris Hayes (aka Mr. Kate Shaw) to fully process the drama of the last Supreme Court term. It's our second annual crossover with Why Is This Happening?!
Another year, another pretty consequential Supreme Court term. SCOTUS recently ended its term with a number of big decisions including striking down affirmative action and issuing opinions in the 303 Creative case, in which the majority created a “constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class,” as noted in Justice Sotomayor’s dissent. It also invalidated the Biden administration’s student debt relief program. Meanwhile, there’s increasing concern about recent allegations of ethical improprieties of SCOTUS justices, like the luxury fishing trip, reported by ProPublica, that Justice Alito took back in 2008 with GOP billionaire Paul Singer, who later had at least 10 cases before the high court. There’s a lot to unpack and we’re excited to share our second crossover episode with the hosts of the Strict Scrutiny podcast, Chris’ wife Kate Shaw, and her co-hosts Melissa Murray and Leah Litman. They join to discuss some of the most egregious actions from the super conservative majority of the Court, what’s at stake for American democracy and cases to look out for in the next term.
