{"id":339,"date":"2026-07-06T13:40:22","date_gmt":"2026-07-06T13:40:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339"},"modified":"2026-07-06T13:40:22","modified_gmt":"2026-07-06T13:40:22","slug":"is-the-roberts-court-hyperopic-or-willfully-blind","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339","title":{"rendered":"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Please note that SCOTUS Outside Opinions constitute the views of outside contributors and do not\u00a0necessarily\u00a0reflect the opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff.<\/em><\/p>\n

Read more Looking back and looking ahead<\/a><\/p>\n

Speaking at a Federalist Society event the day the Supreme Court wrapped up its latest term, attorney Kannon Shanmugam described an \u201cemerging theme\u201d in the case results. \u201cOn issues of . . . broader significance,\u201d the head of Davis Polk\u2019s Supreme Court and appellate practice group said, \u201cthe, quote-unquote, \u2018conservative\u2019 side is typically winning. On issues that are more specific to this administration, the outcomes are sometimes different.\u201d<\/p>\n

I agree with Shanmugam\u2019s view about the court\u2019s conservatism with respect to the issues of broad significance \u2013 what I would call issues of longstanding interest to conservatives. In the term just completed, LGBTQ advocates lost cases involving and . The court validated Second Amendment claims in two (although even the liberal justices went along with the result in ). The conservative super-majority continued its long-running project of dismantling the Voting Rights Act in that was handed down just in time for Republicans to further gerrymander their congressional districts before the upcoming midterm elections. By the usual 6-3 vote, the a provision of federal campaign finance law. And perhaps most significantly, the court struck down statutory restrictions on the president\u2019s power to remove the leaders of nearly all independent federal agencies.<\/p>\n

I also agree with Shanmugam about the most of the past term. In rejecting President Donald Trump\u2019s effort to impose sweeping and unprecedented tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the court relied on workaday tools of statutory construction and (for a plurality) the ideologically conservative major questions doctrine to achieve an ideologically conservative outcome. Trump\u2019s love of tariffs runs contrary to the traditional conservative preference for free trade and opposition to taxes of any sort. The case thus fits Shanmugam\u2019s paradigm quite well.<\/p>\n

However, it would be a mistake to read the term just concluded as proving that the Supreme Court\u2019s conservative super-majority are traditional conservatives rather than MAGA conservatives (and, to be clear, I do not attribute that mistaken view to Shanmugam or anyone else; I consider it because it might seem a logical inference from the pattern of decisions). In the major cases in which the Trump administration lost, the outcome would have been different were it not for the votes of the liberal justices. Moreover, in validating longstanding conservative positions, the court handed the Trump administration in particular enormous power.<\/p>\n

No traditional conservative majority<\/strong><\/p>\n

Supreme Court pundits will disagree about what counts as a major ideologically freighted case, but by my count, the Trump administration lost five such cases in the past term: on tariffs, , , , and . In each case the outcome would have flipped if not for the votes of liberal justices.<\/p>\n

The court\u2019s rejection of the administration\u2019s narrow reading of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment illustrates the fact that the Supreme Court is not dominated by a traditional conservative, anti-MAGA majority. Consider the fact that four of the six Republican appointees thought the Trump executive order limiting birthright citizenship constitutionally valid in at least some of its applications. That hardly paints a picture of traditional conservatives standing against Trumpism.<\/p>\n

On the contrary, the divisions on display in Trump v. Barbara<\/em> might signal that limiting who counts as an American and hostility to undocumented immigration are becoming standard conservative positions. That interpretation is bolstered by the administration\u2019s two big wins for its restrictive immigration policies. The the president broad power to end Temporary Protected Status and to permit the administration to block asylum by physically blocking asylum seekers. Both decisions were by an ideologically divided 6-3 margin.<\/p>\n

The Federal Reserve case is also illustrative. Traditional business-friendly conservatives surely value an independent central bank as essential to address the risk of disastrous monetary policy. Politicians too often will favor low interest rates to stimulate the economy in the short term to create what economists call a sugar high. But the long-term impact of a too-accommodative monetary policy is sustained high inflation or even catastrophic hyper-inflation. In pressuring the Fed to lower interest rates in the face of persistent above-target inflation, Trump demonstrates the precise reason for Fed independence.<\/p>\n

Read more A tale of two justices and their children\u2019s books<\/a><\/p>\n

And yet Trump v. Cook<\/em> was decided by a mere 5-4 margin, with only two of the court\u2019s six conservatives voting to reject Trump\u2019s pretextual effort to fire a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.<\/p>\n

Missing the trees for the forest<\/strong><\/p>\n

The cases that are best explained as fulfilling longstanding conservative goals squarely undermine any notion that the court is resisting Trump\u2019s agenda. In those cases, the court is most charitably described as hyperopic<\/em>. Whereas people experiencing myopia see only what is immediately before them rather than the big picture, hyperopia is the opposite: one sees objects in the distance but not those up close.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court\u2019s most hyperopic decision in recent years came in Trump v. United States<\/em> in 2024. The conservative justices gave sitting and former presidents sweeping immunity against criminal prosecution for acts within the \u201couter perimeter\u201d of their official responsibilities for fear that the possibility of criminal liability might prevent them from taking necessary bold actions. The court worried about a hypothetical future risk even as it ignored the not-at-all-hypothetical reality of a once-and-future president who, thanks to the court\u2019s conferral of immunity, was able to completely avoid accountability for fomenting an attempted coup.<\/p>\n

The most hyperopic decision of the 2025-26 term was , in which the court overruled the 1935 precedent of Humphrey\u2019s Executor v. United States<\/em> and invalidated good-cause removal protection for members of the Federal Trade Commission. True, conservative scholars and justices had been championing the unitary executive theory on which the Slaughter <\/em>decision relied since well before Donald Trump became a politician. And earlier Roberts court rulings had narrowed Humphrey\u2019s<\/em>. Thus, one could have imagined the court handing down Slaughter <\/em>during any administration (although it is easier to imagine the case coming down during a Republican administration than during a Democratic one). Nonetheless, by seizing the opportunity to achieve the long-term goal of eliminating independent agencies at this particular moment, the court ignored the very real dangers the second Trump administration poses.<\/p>\n

Given how Trump\u2019s appointees have weakened the ability of executive agencies to perform their statutory functions while abusing the powers they have, this would appear to be the worst possible time to give the president control over federal agencies that Congress designed to act independently of direct presidential supervision. And yet that is exactly what the court did in Slaughter<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Indeed, the dangers the current administration poses to democracy are so apparent that hyperopia may be too charitable a description of the court\u2019s approach. Willful blindness might be a better descriptor. If so, then Mullin v. Doe<\/em>, the TPS case, would be most emblematic of the past term.<\/p>\n

After concluding that the TPS statute precludes judicial review of non-constitutional claims, the court went on to reject the respondents\u2019 argument that the decision to end TPS for Haitians was racially motivated. In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan pointed to Trump\u2019s description of Haiti as a \u201cshithole\u201d country as well as his calumnies that Haitians in Ohio were eating people\u2019s pets, \u201cprobably have AIDS,\u201d and are \u201cpoisoning the blood\u201d of our country. The majority failed to mention any of those or any other statements, writing that \u201c[n]one of the cited statements by either the President or [former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem] was overtly racial, and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race-neutral justifications.\u201d Justice Samuel Alito, who delivered the lead opinion, did not say what policy view Trump was expressing by accusing Haitians of eating the cats and dogs of Springfield, Ohio.<\/p>\n

* * *<\/p>\n

In iconic statuary, Lady Justice is blindfolded to symbolize the ideal of impartiality: all persons are equal before the law, which should be administered without favor to rich or poor, friend or foe. The Roberts court has evidently drawn a different lesson from the image of blind justice. Its decisions are blind to the consequences of handing ever more power to an authoritarian president with precious little regard for democracy, the Constitution, or even basic decency.<\/p>\n

Read more The Trump term?<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Please note that SCOTUS Outside Opinions constitute the views of outside contributors and do not\u00a0necessarily\u00a0reflect the opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff. Read more Looking back and looking ahead Speaking at a Federalist Society event the day the Supreme Court wrapped up its latest term, attorney Kannon Shanmugam described an \u201cemerging theme\u201d in the case […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":338,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-commentary","category-scotus-outside-opinions"],"yoast_head":"\nIs the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind? - American Service Review<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind? - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Please note that SCOTUS Outside Opinions constitute the views of outside contributors and do not\u00a0necessarily\u00a0reflect the opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff. Read more Looking back and looking ahead Speaking at a Federalist Society event the day the Supreme Court wrapped up its latest term, attorney Kannon Shanmugam described an \u201cemerging theme\u201d in the case […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-06T13:40:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind?\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-06T13:40:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339\"},\"wordCount\":1406,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Commentary\",\"SCOTUS OUTSIDE OPINIONS\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339\",\"name\":\"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind? - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-06T13:40:22+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":627},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=339#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"American Service Review\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind? - American Service Review","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind? - American Service Review","og_description":"Please note that SCOTUS Outside Opinions constitute the views of outside contributors and do not\u00a0necessarily\u00a0reflect the opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff. Read more Looking back and looking ahead Speaking at a Federalist Society event the day the Supreme Court wrapped up its latest term, attorney Kannon Shanmugam described an \u201cemerging theme\u201d in the case […]","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-07-06T13:40:22+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind?","datePublished":"2026-07-06T13:40:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339"},"wordCount":1406,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg","articleSection":["Commentary","SCOTUS OUTSIDE OPINIONS"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339","name":"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind? - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg","datePublished":"2026-07-06T13:40:22+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/d1b0295432d8c936d1d17a47a26f0839.jpg","width":1200,"height":627},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=339#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Is the Roberts court hyperopic or willfully blind?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/","name":"American Service Review","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/americanservicereview.com"],"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=339"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/338"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=339"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=339"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=339"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}