Robe Rage: SCOTUS Disregards District Courts
Previous News Briefings have criticized how the Supreme Court uses the “shadow docket,” where it can simply issue verdicts without explaining or justifying them, to push Trump’s agenda. But an analysis by Stanford professor Adam Bonica shows just how extreme the Court is acting. Judges of both parties in lower courts have ruled against Trump’s executive orders in 82 of 87 cases—94% of the time. The Supreme Court, in contrast, has ruled for Trump 94% of the time. It’s like watching Tiger Woods—a once-in-a-lifetime swing.
This stat isn’t *quite* as bad as it looks. Lawsuits against Trump’s policies have been disproportionately filed in Democratic judicial districts, with plaintiffs “venue shopping” for a favorable court. (Just like how Republican challenges to Biden’s policies were disproportionately filed in Texas.) So it makes sense that lots of lower courts would rule against Trump. Plus, the Trump administration has not advanced all its losses to the Supreme Court (even they know some of these policies are, to use a legal term, duds.) But still, to quote Bonica, “District court judges, who see the evidence firsthand and hear directly from those affected, overwhelmingly find the administration’s actions unlawful…Then the Supreme Court—furthest from facts, closest to power—reverses almost automatically.”
Art by C.M. Duffy from Current Affairs Magazine Vol. 9, Issue 51
If ...