The Court Fools Itself

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

64% : As Federalist No. 51 put it, "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition."
63% : The Supreme Court puts Trump above the lawWe could speculate on how presidents without fear of the law might act, but we already have a historical example in Trump's favorite president, Andrew Jackson.
46% : Given the work the Trump justices have done here, the billionaire class' affection for Trump, often presented as counterintuitive, is not difficult to understand.
35% : In "Federalist No. 69," Alexander Hamilton wrote that former presidents would "be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law."
35% : The justices, less independent arbiters than the shock troops of the conservative movement, wanted Trump to be immune to prosecution, and so they conjured a rationale for doing so, with a narrow window of legal accountability that only they have the right to determine.
34% : In 2022 , Vanity Fair reported that Vance had appeared on a podcast in which he said, "I think Trump is going to run again in 2024," and added:This is not a view of executive power that is going to submit to whatever legal technicalities the justices might use to restrain it, if they even wanted to.
33% : In the history of presidential crimes, the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans dwarfs anything Trump has done.
26% : Whatever crimes Trump has committed in the past, or chooses to commit in the future, he will, unlike Jackson, have the Supreme Court's blessing -- so long as he can disguise them as official acts.
22% : But even if Trump loses in November, this concept of presidential immunity conjured up by the Roberts Court has made the current crisis of American democracy perpetual.
15% : But that window might as well be barred from the inside: What Jackson's story shows is that the feeble, arbitrary restraints the justices put into their own grant of royal immunity to Trump will not withstand any president with the capacity to violate them.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.