General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSupreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dire warning comes true: study
By Alexander Willis
Published January 5, 2026 1:52 PM ET
Liberal Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson warned last summer that her conservative colleagues on the bench were doing irreparable harm to the courts image as they increasingly sided with the rich and powerful, and a new study published Monday appeared to validate those fears.
Published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, the study found that since the 1950s, conservative Supreme Court justices increasingly issued rulings that favored the wealthy when compared to their liberal counterparts.
Researchers analyzed 1,782 Supreme Court cases and classified justices votes as either pro-rich which they defined as a vote that produced an outcome [that] would directly shift resources to the party that is more likely to be wealthy or pro-poor. Researchers found that conservative justices cast pro-rich votes 70% of the time by the end of 2022, a stark contrast to liberal justices 35% during the same time period.
https://www.rawstory.com/supreme-court-2674849387/
Fiendish Thingy
(22,091 posts)Kill the filibuster and expand the court, neutralizing the MAGA majority.
Should be a litmus test for all Dem senate candidates
turbinetree
(26,998 posts)lastlib
(27,573 posts)Repealing/overturning Citizens United. Get the d%&*# money OUT of politics!
turbinetree
(26,998 posts)cstanleytech
(28,234 posts)What is needed is a new Amendment that charges the way Judges become a SCOTUS judge. My preferred method would be that they are randomly picked from the Federal judges already on the bench and they serve a single nine year term and after that they are automatically retired.
They also can never be nominated or appointed to be a judge on any Federal court after that.
Also, if they decline the SCOTUS selection they are automatically retired and cannot ever be nominated or appointed to any Federal court.
It would make it much harder then for the wealthy to gain control over the Court in the future like they have currently managed to do right now as the choice of a new SCOTUS judges would be completely random.
Fiendish Thingy
(22,091 posts)If the court is expanded and Democrats govern fearlessly, without hesitation, it will be a generation or more before republicans again have a trifecta (see FDR and the New Deal).
Polybius
(21,528 posts)2016: Republican
2020: Democratic
2024: Republican
2028 will presumably go to a Democrat, making it an unprecedented five times. I don't see any Party holding it for more than two terms anymore.
Fiendish Thingy
(22,091 posts)Past performance is no guarantee of future returns
I agree, if we get timid centrist governance in 2029, Dems arent likely to hold onto power for long.
It has been 80+ years since Dems had a trifecta and governed progressively without fear or hesitation (LBJ came close, but
Viet Nam, and Biden tried but was sabotaged).
If Dems expand the court and govern fearlessly in 2029, the voters will reward them for a generation.
Polybius
(21,528 posts)But even if he's very popular, there's no guarantee that another Democrat carries the torch in 2036. Obama was popular, Bill Clinton more so. Still produced a Republican in 2000 and 2016.
One reason I detest the 22nd. It's pretty much only hurt us.
Fiendish Thingy
(22,091 posts)Thats just silly.
Polybius
(21,528 posts)But I'm a huge fan of him and his appeal. I just can't think of anyone better at the moment. Charisma sells.
Fiendish Thingy
(22,091 posts)But as we have seen far too often, it cant always govern.
cstanleytech
(28,234 posts)Believe me, I wish we had a liberal majority on SCOTUS but even if we passed a law to increase the number positions on SCOTUS and packed with with liberal judges the Republicans would just increase it more later on.
So, no I can't get behind increasing the.number of SCOTUS judges as it's a recipe that will lead to unending chain of resentment and anger.
An Amendment though SCOTUS Judges automatically out while randomly picking a Federal Judge that's already been confirmed to their current position would work out a lot better in the long run than any law to increase the number of judges ever could.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(24,599 posts)And the U.S. Extreme Court.
Do you want to expand the court in this environment? Instead of Trump's 6-3 majority, it'll be 10-3. (with Justice Cannon in the mix)
Fiendish Thingy
(22,091 posts)I figured that part was obvious.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(24,599 posts)Increase their majority, and maybe slam the door on Dems for the foreseeable future
BurnDoubt
(1,490 posts)Two BOGUS appointments and one with a hinky past and a taste for the grog, and two quite obviously for sale.
Not even Justice adjacent.
The Heritage Foundation... Terrorism in Geologic Time.
Everything he touches turns to Shit...
Ergo... Shithole Country.
KBJ... You are the light of the Future. Make ' em Cry.
kwolf68
(8,262 posts)On issue after issue, a majority side with the Liberal position. Yet, the SCOTUS is 67% far right wing. We have states with more cows than people than have as much power as states with more people than many nations and would rank among the top 20 in world wide GDP.
Sadly, the only thing that will make change is for shit to get really bad and then many will wake up and go, "damn, those libtards were right afterall". Sadly, by then it won't matter.
Dave says
(5,331 posts)Although I acknowledge they can (and seemingly will) get much worse.