Ian Millhiser, senior correspondent at Vox, recently dropped a must-read on one of the most galling features of today’s Supreme Court: the shadow docket.
It’s the legal equivalent of fast-tracking a decision without the usual hearings, written opinions, or transparency. Historically, it was used sparingly—only when a case had a strong chance of succeeding and there was clear irreparable harm in letting a lower court ruling stand.
But today’s shadow docket is something else entirely. It’s become just another weapon in the conservative Supreme Court’s arsenal to tilt the scales in the GOP’s favor—especially for President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly benefited from this judicial shortcut in both of his terms. But President Joe Biden wasn’t so lucky.
Now liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has had enough, openly calling out her conservative colleagues for abandoning even the pretense of restraint and turning the Supreme Court into a partisan cudgel.
As Millhiser writes:
Maybe there is a nonpartisan explanation for why the Court treated Biden differently than Trump… But, if such an explanation exists, the Republican justices did not explain what it is… They’ve chosen to sit silently while Jackson levies some very serious charges against them — all while presenting evidence that strongly suggests her colleagues are rooting their shadow docket decisions in partisanship and not the law.
Let’s be blunt: When a 6-3 conservative majority still feels compelled to rig the rules for Trump, that’s not jurisprudence; it’s corruption. This isn’t about ideology. It’s about raw, unaccountable power cloaked in judicial robes.
And it’s not new. The rot goes back at least to Bush v. Gore, when the conservative justices handed George W. Bush the presidency, even though he lost both the popular vote and, frankly, Florida. That ruling was so nakedly partisan that the majority actually wrote that it shouldn’t be used as precedent. They knew how full of shit it was.
But let’s put a pin in the Supreme Court issue for a moment and pivot to this Politico story about a recent conference hosted by “centrist” Democrats, which was framed as a counterweight to the party’s left wing. Their thesis? Progressives are why Democrats lose elections.
Now, anyone who’s followed me for the last 23 years knows I’m a pragmatist. I back progressive candidates when they help us win, and I criticize left-wing rigidity when it loses us elections. But let’s be real: The biggest disadvantage progressives face isn’t policy; it’s the media ecosystem.
The right has one. We don’t.
Donald Trump and Kamala Harris shake hands at the start of a presidential debate in 2024.
Right-wing billionaires built Fox News, talk radio, and Facebook propaganda farms. Progressives? We waste hundreds of millions of dollars on TV ads that no one remembers and invest pennies in media that can actually shape public opinion.
Just look at 2024. Kamala Harris and her outside allies raised more than $1.1 billion, while Trump and his outside allies raised just over $600 million. Democrats also outraised Republicans in Senate and House races but still lost. Why? Because TV ads don’t stand a chance against the right-wing noise machine.
So, yeah, if you’re reading this, please consider redirecting your political donations away from TV ads and into media infrastructure—like Daily Kos and your other favorite progressive outlets. That’s how we change minds. That’s how we win.
If focusing on what voters care about is the centrists’ message, I’m not arguing. If Democrats want to get together to figure out how to win over voters in next year’s brutal battleground states—Nebraska, Iowa, Florida, and Texas—then great. If the economy is what voters care about—and they do—then let’s talk about the economy, and only the economy, until the day after the election.
If that’s called “centrism,” fine. I don’t care. I just want to win.
And if that sidelines some groups who haven’t done much to help Democrats win power? Also fine.
Politico quotes Justice Democrats as the progressive foil to centrists, but come on. This is the group that excommunicated Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. That’s not a serious organization; it’s a purity cult. And it’s a shame, because their anti-billionaire message is great. But if AOC isn’t pure enough for them, then … good luck.
The problem isn’t centrism. The problem is people who hide behind centrism to avoid doing what’s right.
Which brings me back to the Supreme Court. The New York Times reported that at that same centrist conference, organizers were handing out buttons pushing a campaign to keep the Supreme Court at nine justices.
Pushing to lock in nine justices—after Republicans stole two seats—isn’t just absurd, it’s strategically suicidal. It’s also weird for a group that claims that we need to focus on the issues that voters actually care about to make this a talking point.
President Donald Trump gestures to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts after being sworn in for his second term.
The average voter isn’t concerned about the Supreme Court headcount. No average voter gives a damn about court packing. They didn’t care when Republicans rigged the court, and they don’t care about the shadow docket.
They care about groceries, rent, wages, and whether they can afford to live.
But here’s the thing: just because voters aren’t talking about the Supreme Court doesn’t mean that Democrats should ignore it. If we retake the White House and both chambers of Congress, we should expand the court immediately. The Constitution gives us that power.
Because this isn’t an ideological court. If it were, there’d be a stronger case for leaving it alone. Rather, this is a partisan court. It rewrites precedent depending on who’s in the White House. It changes the rules to help Republicans and punish Democrats. That’s not justice. That’s rot.
Any Democrat arguing to preserve this illegitimate 6-3 conservative majority is arguing for one thing: permanent conservative rule.
That doesn’t mean that we explicitly run on court expansion, but it sure as hell means that, if we ever get the power, we fix this broken institution.
Whether you’re a proud progressive or a data-driven centrist, if you actually believe in democracy, the current Supreme Court cannot stand.
