The Looming Influence of State Supreme Courts

The Looming Influence of State Supreme Courts

The Looming Influence of State Supreme Courts

Their authority over public policy has been increasing for decades.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

EDITOR’S NOTE: Each week we cross-post an excerpt from Katrina vanden Heuvel’s column at the WashingtonPost.com. Read the full text of Katrina’s column here.

While all eyes are on the confirmation hearings for President Biden’s Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson, 86 state supreme court battles are quietly brewing across the country. These races rarely receive coverage on cable news, but they could have an even greater impact on Americans’ lives—and on the future of our democracy.

For decades, the Supreme Court has gradually outsourced responsibilities to lower courts—giving state supreme courts increasing authority over public policy. In the early 1980s, the Supreme Court regularly decided more than 150 cases per term. In its last full term, it heard just 62 cases. Worse, a 2014 Reuters investigation found that cases are increasingly heard from a select group of lawyers—most of whom “worked for law firms that primarily represented corporate interests.”

And even among the dwindling cases the Supreme Court is hearing, it has frequently limited the scope of its authority, particularly over voting rights. Take the 2019 partisan gerrymandering case, where the court’s conservative majority threw its hands in the air and claimed the case was beyond its purview—leaving state courts as the primary judicial battleground for gerrymandering disputes. Similarly, in a 2018 gay rights case and a 2021 case on Texas’s restrictive abortion law, the court ruled that it could not issue a judgment on key legal questions, leaving them to be adjudicated back in state courts. (It just so happens that this particular interpretation of judicial authority mostly benefited Republicans.)

Read the full text of Katrina’s column here.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x