TNR / The New Republic – [no paywall] “…The United States is less democratic, less self-governing, more dysfunctional, and more corrupt than it was 20 years ago, thanks in large part to the Supreme Court’s rulings. By that standard, the Roberts court has failed. The United States is less democratic, less self-governing, more dysfunctional, and more corrupt than it was 20 years ago, thanks in large part to the Supreme Court’s rulings. Many of its most important decisions—on campaign finance, on voting rights, on gerrymandering, and on the separation of powers—have left us less able to resolve political questions and issues than any previous generation has been. “Umpires don’t make the rules,” Roberts said, when describing his judicial approach at his 2005 confirmation hearings. “They apply them.” If Roberts is rarely depicted as a firebrand or a zealot, few would deny his unmistakable ideological tilt. And yet, Roberts is often portrayed as a moderating force. His Republican-appointed colleagues may be working to covertly advance an ideological project, but Roberts was different: an arch-institutionalist willing to cast aside his own leanings to preserve the legitimacy of the Supreme Court in a hyper-partisan era. If that was his goal, then he has failed miserably. Public confidence in the Supreme Court as an institution has also collapsed. When Roberts was inaugurated, Gallup found in a September 2005 poll that 56 percent of Americans approved of the court’s job. In July this year, that number had dropped to 39 percent—the first sub-40 result in the survey’s history.
Some of that decline can be attributed to a shift in the court’s makeup: Roughly 10 percent of Democrats and around one-third of independents approve of the work of a Supreme Court that now boasts a conservative supermajority. But Roberts shares much of the blame himself. Over the course of two decades, he has overseen an effort that has steadily chipped away at many of the twentieth century’s pivotal decisions, made government less responsive and effective, and handed enormous power to corporations and the extremely rich. How did we get here? Any survey of the Roberts court’s impact on American political life must begin with Citizens United v. FEC. The 2010 ruling overturned key portions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which limited how corporations and unions could spend money on political campaigns during an election cycle. In doing so, the court limited earlier campaign finance rulings that had allowed Congress to constrain donors’ influence and thus prevent the appearance or reality of corruption.
