The Supreme Court is protecting Trump by beginning to say "No."
Trump has a well-deserved reputation for high-handed overreach. It worries voters.
Polls by Pew, Gallup, and Quinnipiac have the same message:
-- about 79 percent of independents say Trump has gone too far outside our system of checks and balances.
-- about 78 percent of voters support congressional oversight to hold the executive branch accountable.
-- about 56 percent say a president should not be able to impose unilateral tariffs.
-- about 86 percent of independents and 65 percent of Republicans said members of Congress should represent their constituents rather than agree with the president.
The Supreme Court's 6-3 Republican-appointed majority added to the image of Trump as unchecked. They reversed precedent on abortion. They made Trump immune from prosecution. They slow-walked cases that put him in legal jeopardy. Trump bragged that he had a compliant Supreme Court.
Voters in mid-cycle elections traditionally rein in a president by reducing or reversing his congressional majorities -- that well-known "thermostatic oscillation" phenomenon. Democratic strategists are talking about a blue wave.
The Supreme Court's six-person majority supports a Republican policy agenda, which means supporting Trump when they can. Trump is a troublesome team captain. They are empowering an executive who openly insults the judiciary, but he is a Republican carrying out a Republican agenda. Trump saying that the Supreme Court owes him obedience complicates their task of looking neutral while running interference for him. We have the conservative court that voters chose, and they are acting on their beliefs.
They appear to have gotten more strategic about how they carry out their agenda. They see the 2026 election peril for Republicans. I wrote about the reversal by Brett Kavanaugh two days ago, him now saying that ICE cannot detain and carry out its rough-up deportation theater on people solely on the basis of their being Hispanic. A "Kavanaugh stop" wasn't just bad for Brett Kavanaugh's reputation; it was bad for a Republican Party that is winning Hispanic votes.
The Supreme Court voted this week to stop Trump from deploying national guard troops in Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland. Voters thought it excessive and over-reach. Trump wasn't getting the message, but the Supreme Court did.
I expect the Supreme Court to save Trump from himself on birthright citizenship. Republicans want to stop the "browning" of America, but a change would be a conspicuous reversal of precedent. It would would not affect solely immigrants and mixed-status families. It would be a contentious mess to administer for states and hospitals, since the child's status would be contingent on the legal status of the parents, which is subject to change by presidential decree, is hard to substantiate, and is subject to contention long after the infant's birth.
I also expect the Supreme Court to stop -- or at least highly restrict -- Trump's unilateral tariff-making. Most tariffs are disruptive and bad for business. They will trigger inflation or a recession, and voters hate both.
Democrats will celebrate Court setbacks for Trump, but this is a mixed blessing for them. Trump and MAGA aren't stopped by court decisions. The Trump wave dies when it is rejected at the ballot box. Trump is politically strongest when he is free of congressional restraint because a GOP majority is obedient. That is what he has. Trump is free to do almost anything he wants, except when he is blocked from doing unpopular things. A Supreme Court that sometimes says "No" preserves an illusion that a strong system of checks and balances is in place. The reality is a president who can do anything he wants except when he does something flagrantly foolish and unpopular.
The Supreme Court is the wrong branch to advise and consent on policy, but they are the ones stepping up. They aren't stopping Trump or protecting the Constitution. They are a political branch, protecting Trump's popularity from his own worst instincts.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com and subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
9 comments:
Ah, the illusion of balance: just enough brake to keep the Imperial juggernaut car on the road misnamed Democracy. Need more gas? Who do we invade next?
I don't like a President using executive orders to make legislation, because it nullifies the purpose of congress and senate. Trump isn't God or the King, but unfortunately he's not the first President to abuse executive orders. Biden and Obama used them too. Even Tina Kotek abuses executive orders because Oregon has a weak legislature that cowers at Tina Kotek and Kate Brown. Rather than whine, Democrats need to file endless lawsuits against Trump until he gets the message. Trump does what he does because he knows he can get away with it.
I used to believe the Supreme Court was politically neutral. Ignorance was bliss.
Can’t imagine much worse high-handed overreach than overnight military regime change in order to “run” Venezuela with the aid of beneficent American oil companies, along with corresponding saber-rattling warnings across the hemisphere under a so-called “Donroe” Doctrine. What a prospective shambles. This is Congress’ purview, and maybe to a lesser extent SCOTUS’ too.
Neutral ever since the Warren court?!
Is it better to be open about the imperial American war machine’s oil fueled regime change this time instead of making up stories about weapons of mass destruction?
It was reported that Trump captured Venezuela's Maduro yesterday. I can't say that I support Trump going into another country and kidnapping their President. If that's the case, then perhaps we'll be lucky to have the Chinese or Russians capture Trump at some point. Trump may do some things right, but he also does a lot of things wrong.
Alito and Thomas should be impeached. That would bring the court into relative balance.
Fair enough, but fentanyl (Venezuelan? Sure.) is the putative WMD now.
Oil this time, explicitly, but did we ever actually end up with any Iraqi oil?
Post a Comment