Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is clearly aware of public perceptions related to the high court, though he apparently wants Americans to see him and fellow justices as above the political fray. The Associated Press reported on his latest public remarks:
“I think, at a very basic level, people think we’re making policy decisions, we’re saying we think this is how things should be, as opposed to what the law provides,” he said. “I think they view us as purely political actors, which I don’t think is an accurate understanding of what we do.”
His remarks to a conference of judges and lawyers from the 3rd U.S. Circuit in Pennsylvania came at a time of low public confidence in the court, and about a week after the court handed down a decision that hollowed out the Voting Rights Act.
As part of the same remarks, Roberts went on to argue that sitting justices are not “part of the political process … and I’m not sure people grasp that as much as is appropriate.”
The chief justice’s impression of public attitudes was the only element of this that was compelling: In recent years, a wide variety of national polls really have found Americans’ confidence in the Supreme Court collapsing to unprecedented depths.
Occasionally, the jurists make a modest effort to argue that the public is mistaken. In 2021, as part of her first public speech after she was confirmed under highly controversial circumstances, Justice Amy Coney Barrett declared, “My goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks.”
(The conservative justice could have picked a better forum: Barrett made the comments alongside then-Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who rushed her onto the bench as part of a brazenly political scheme, at a University of Louisville center that bears his name.)
Justice Brett Kavanaugh made similar comments in 2023, insisting that the Supreme Court is “an institution of law, not of politics, not of partisanship.” He added that he believes the current lineup of justices has succeeded in “deciding cases based on law and not based on partisan affiliation and partisanship.”
Roberts’ latest pitch, in other words, was part of a series of defenses that appear to have no discernible effect on changing public perceptions.
It’s incumbent on the justices to consider not only why most Americans believe the Supreme Court is motivated by politics, but also their own role in fueling the problem they apparently find offensive.
Recommended
Why does the public see the justices, as Roberts put it, as “political actors”? It might have something to do with far-right justices issuing regressive and reactionary rulings. And far-right justices getting caught up in indefensible ethics controversies. And far-right justices elevating the presidency above the law.
But I suspect one of the main reasons so many people see justices as “political actors” is the frequency with which they act like political actors. Right around the same time that the public was learning about Roberts’ remarks, Justice Neil Gorsuch, who has a track record of chatting with conservative media personalities, appeared on a conservative podcast, talking about his belief that “young conservatives must have courage to stand by their beliefs.”
Last month, Justice Clarence Thomas delivered a public broadside against progressives. Justice Samuel Alito is on record giving a variety of related conservative speeches in front of conservative audiences, in which he’s publicly condemned the left. (When the Federalist Society held an event in celebration of its 40th anniversary in 2022, four sitting Republican-appointed justices were on hand to lend their support to the unabashedly conservative organization. Alito declared at the gathering, “Boy, is your work needed today.”)
Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut argued five years ago, “Judges turning into political actors, giving speeches attacking journalists, is terrible for the court and terrible for democracy.” Justices proceeded to ignore the warning.
The tarnishing of the Supreme Court — its credibility, its integrity and its reputation — has unfolded episodically over the course of several years. If Roberts and his brethren want to whine about public reactions to their work, that’s their right, but if they want to help restore the institution’s standing, they have an enormous amount of work to do. To date, they have shown no willingness whatsoever to even acknowledge the causes of the Supreme Court’s problems, much less take steps to address what ails it.
This post updates our related earlier coverage.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post