A Lifelong Legislature of Lawyers Who Prefer the Robe to the Campaign Trial

As many are beginning to understand after listening to oral arguments today, the Supreme Court does not exclusively weigh the law, the facts, the text, and the history to come to its conclusions. Sometimes it does that. But in the most political and contentious cases, that is…

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) April 1, 2026

… most definitely not what happens.

We do not actually have a supreme court, we have a lifelong legislature of lawyers who prefer the robe to the campaign trial.

One-third of the court makes decisions based entirely on what is best for the Democrat party and never wavers from that mission. Only two of the nine justices seem to have any consistent interest in determining a given law’s text and original meaning.

Of the remaining four, the chief justice thinks he’s a thermometer whose job is take to the temperature of the country and then make decisions based on whether they’ll make people like him. The former professor seems to think she’s still writing academic papers. The former Western judge is occasionally reliable when he’s not claiming boys can become girls or fan-girling over Indian treaties. The final justice seems to be saddled with the horrifying task of corralling the two rudderless and emotional basket cases into something resembling coherence.

And if that weren’t horrifying enough, let me comfort you with the observation that this collection of Democrat party operatives, weepy thermometers, wannabe legislators, and only sometimes actual lawyers is actually the least dysfunctional of the three federal branches of government.

Happy Wednesday!