Roger Passman-Fischel 
18th Century Discrimination and Justice For Sale—A 21st Century Court in Tatters
The Supreme Court is Losing its Way: Introduction
The Supreme Court is Losing its Way, once a pillar of judicial integrity, now teeters on the brink of public distrust. Recent rulings and ethics scandals suggest a troubling shift: the Court increasingly serves the interests of the powerful, undermines social progress, and threatens democracy itself. Naming names and scrutinizing specific actions reveal a judiciary disconnected from the Constitution’s promise of equality and fairness.
Corporate Influence: Justice for Sale
In Citizens United v. FEC (2010), the Court ruled that corporate spending in elections equates to free speech, allowing unlimited
money to flood the political system. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who authored the opinion, claimed it would not lead to corruption. Yet, this decision birthed Super PACs and anonymous dark money groups, enabling billionaires like the Koch brothers to dominate elections. Corporations now steer policymaking, leaving citizens voiceless in their democracy.
Justice Clarence Thomas exemplifies this corruption. Reports reveal that he accepted luxury vacations, private jet flights, and real estate deals from Harlan Crow, a billionaire with interests before the Court. Thomas failed to disclose these gifts, violating basic ethical standards. Justice Samuel Alito faced similar scrutiny after flying on a private jet owned by billionaire Paul Singer, whose hedge fund later won a Supreme Court case. Neither justice recused themselves, showcasing blatant disregard for impartiality.
Religious Freedom or Discrimination? Discrimination Raises its Ugly Head!
The Court’s embrace of religious freedom as a justification for discrimination has led to alarming decisions. In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023), Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled in favor of a web designer refusing service to LGBTQ+ clients, citing religious beliefs. This decision revives legalized bigotry, setting a precedent for businesses to deny services to marginalized groups. Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s religiously motivated jurisprudence has also sparked concerns. Her affiliation with the ultraconservative People of Praise raises questions about her impartiality in cases involving women’s and LGBTQ+ rights.
Ethics: A Self-Policing Sham Guaranteed to Fail
The Court’s ethical lapses extend beyond questionable rulings. Unlike lower courts, the Supreme Court operates without a binding code of conduct. Chief Justice John Roberts touts the Court’s internal “ethics statement,” but it lacks enforcement mechanisms. Even bipartisan calls for reform, such as the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act introduced in Congress, face resistance from the justices themselves. This self-policing system leaves the public with little recourse to address misconduct.
The Supreme Court is Losing its Way: Who Benefits?
While the Court dismantles protections for everyday Americans, corporations and right-wing interest groups reap the rewards. In Janus v. AFSCME (2018), Justice Alito struck a blow against public-sector unions, weakening their ability to advocate for workers. The Court’s pro-business tilt undermines labor rights and environmental protections, all while reinforcing wealth inequality.
What Can Be Done?
Restoring the Court’s integrity demands immediate action. Congress must pass legislation mandating a binding code of ethics for justices. Public pressure on the Court to adopt transparency measures, such as disclosing donor influence, is critical. Expanding the Court or imposing term limits could also curb its outsized power. Most importantly, citizens must demand accountability by voting for leaders who prioritize judicial reform.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court is losing its way, trading the Constitution’s ideals for corporate money, religious extremism, and personal gain. By naming justices and exposing their actions, we highlight the urgent need for systemic reform. Without change, this institution risks becoming a bastion of privilege rather than a guardian of justice.
Sources Cited
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010).
303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. ___ (2023).
ProPublica. (2023). Clarence Thomas and the billionaires.
Janus v. AFSCME, 585 U.S. ___ (2018).
Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023.
Suggestions for Further Reading
Dark Money by Jane Mayer – Investigates how billionaires manipulate the judiciary.
We the Corporations by Adam Winkler – Chronicles the rise of corporate influence in American law.
Supreme Inequality by Adam Cohen – Details how the Court favors the rich.
Packing the Court by James MacGregor Burns – Explores the political motives behind Supreme Court appointments.
The Brethren by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong – Offers a behind-the-scenes look at the Court.
The Nine by Jeffrey Toobin – Analyzes how justices shape legal decisions and public policy.
How Democracies Die by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt – Highlights threats to democratic institutions.
The Case Against the Supreme Court by Erwin Chemerinsky – Critiques the Court’s history of failing to protect rights.
Judicial Misconduct: A Reader edited by Gilbert Geis – A collection of cases and essays on judicial ethics.
DISCLAIMER: The images on this page, and across the whole blog are created using AI imaging and are intended to illustrate the argument in the post. They are NOT representing real people or events directly, rather the images enhance the overall argument and nothing more. We do not intend any offense, nor do we intend to single out individuals in any way by the images themselves.
