The U.S. Supreme Court has long been regarded as the guardian of constitutional balance — a stabilizing force amid political turbulence. But in recent years, that perception has been tested. A series of high-profile rulings and ethical controversies have sparked growing concern across the political spectrum not just about the Court’s decisions but about the institution’s credibility itself.
This isn’t a partisan talking point. It’s a legitimacy issue. From the overturning of affirmative action policies to rulings on religious liberty and gun rights, the Court’s conservative majority has undeniably shifted the legal landscape. Supporters argue these decisions reflect a return to constitutional originalism. Critics see them as ideological overreach.
But regardless of where one stands on the outcomes, the process has raised eyebrows. The increasing use of the “shadow docket” to issue consequential rulings without full transparency, and the selective application of precedent, have left many Americans — left, right and center — wondering whether the Court is still playing by its own rules.
Public confidence is waning. Gallup polling shows trust in the Court at historic lows. That should concern everyone, not just those who disagree with recent decisions. A judiciary perceived as partisan undermines the very principle of equal justice under law. Ethical questions have only deepened the unease. Reports of undisclosed gifts and travel involving Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have fueled calls for reform.
While defenders argue these relationships don’t influence rulings, the lack of a binding code of ethics for the highest court in the land is a glaring omission — especially when lower courts are held to stricter standards. This isn’t about attacking the Court. It’s about preserving it. Rebuilding trust will require more than rhetoric. Congress and the Court should work together to establish clear ethical guidelines and improve transparency. Proposals like term limits or greater disclosure requirements deserve serious, bipartisan debate — not as partisan weapons, but as tools to strengthen the institution.
The Supreme Court is not immune to scrutiny, nor should it be. Its authority depends not just on constitutional text, but on the public’s belief in its fairness and integrity. That belief is faltering. If we want the Court to remain a cornerstone of democracy, we must be willing to hold it to the highest standard — regardless of political leanings.
