Fact Check: the Supreme Court is fair and balanced

Fact Check: "The Supreme Court is fair and balanced"

What We Know

The claim that "the Supreme Court is fair and balanced" is a subjective assertion that can be evaluated through various recent rulings and expert opinions. The Supreme Court's decisions in the 2024-25 term included significant cases on issues such as transgender rights, religious liberty, and free speech. Legal scholars have expressed concerns about the Court's perceived acquiescence to executive power, particularly during the Trump administration, where the Court was criticized for not adequately challenging presidential actions deemed lawless (Harvard Law faculty).

Moreover, the Court's decisions in cases like TikTok v. Garland and Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton raised alarms about the implications for First Amendment rights and the potential chilling effect on free expression. In these cases, the Court's unanimous rulings suggested a consensus among justices, but critics argue that these decisions reflect a troubling trend of prioritizing governmental authority over individual rights.

Analysis

Evaluating the fairness and balance of the Supreme Court requires examining both its rulings and the context in which they occur. The Court's decisions have often been interpreted through a partisan lens, leading to debates about whether it truly operates independently of political influence. For instance, the rulings in the 2024-25 term have been described as a "backlash against the unregulated internet" and a failure to consider less-restrictive alternatives that could protect individual rights while addressing governmental concerns (BU Legal Scholars, Harvard Law faculty).

Critics, including legal scholars, have pointed out that the Court's deference to the executive branch during the Trump presidency raises questions about its commitment to impartiality. The majority's reluctance to challenge presidential actions, even when they appear to violate established law, suggests a potential bias towards maintaining the status quo of executive power (Harvard Law faculty). This has led to a perception that the Court may not be as balanced as the claim suggests.

On the other hand, some argue that the Court's decisions reflect a complex interplay of legal principles rather than straightforward partisan bias. The unexpected coalitions and shifting jurisprudence observed in recent terms indicate that the Court's future decisions may not align neatly along traditional ideological lines (Third Way, SCOTUSblog). This unpredictability could be interpreted as a sign of a more balanced approach to jurisprudence.

Conclusion

The claim that "the Supreme Court is fair and balanced" is Partially True. While the Court has made decisions that reflect a range of judicial philosophies and unexpected coalitions, its recent history, particularly during the Trump administration, raises significant concerns about its impartiality and willingness to challenge executive overreach. The perception of fairness and balance is complicated by the Court's rulings that have significant implications for individual rights and freedoms, suggesting that while it may strive for balance, its actions do not always align with that ideal.

Fact Check: the Supreme Court is fair and balanced