Will the Supreme Court's legacy be" they killed off democracy'?"Trump's "I can do anything I want" attitude had at first been fed by the friendly Supreme Court ruling that he cannot be prosecuted for a crime while in office, and recent 6-3 Court decisions. Those are now on full display and a matter of public record. Trump is now consolidating power and seeking more, acting and ruling as if he is already a dictator, with little in sight to stop him. Over the years, during and since Trump's first term, the GOP Senate leadership has managed to install a Court dominated by ideologues of various extreme think tanks, such as those favored by the Heritage Foundation and screened by other think tanks for ideological purity. With this kind of control by ideologues who want a unitary or much stronger executive branch, no wonderTrump feels comfortable he can gamble by letting "his' Supreme Court decide whether his power grabs have gone too far. In the upcoming session, the Supreme Court will decide whether its 6-0 majority, with a recent track record of usually granting the power he desires whenever the issue is before it, will continue to do so. Three major decisions will be looming, if not more, that will decide if the Court caves to his power grab or not. The Supreme Court's heritage could be known as the enabler of the end of democracy, of, by, and for the people, and instead gives the permission slip to a power-hungry president, allowing it to become a government of, by, and for Trump. There are some crucial tipping point decisions soon before the Supreme Court this fall. With such power in his hands, Trump has the luxury of being able to ignore the economic needs of those who voted for him and other campaign promises made in 2024, especially those thinking that he would reduce their cost of living.
This is a Supreme Court, comprising those with a 6-3 Trump-favoring majority, packed over recent years with ideologues who are presumed to be loyal to the concept of a more powerful executive branch, a unitary system that undermines checks on executive power. They were screened by "conservative" think tanks like the Federalist Society for their tilt before they were nominated, and their Senate approval process was strategized by GOP leadership to prevent even other nominees from being considered.
Those who have advocated for years for the extremist goal of turning the executive branch into a "unitary" government, which is another term for eliminating the checks and balances that Congress and the Judiciary once had, is a goal of the Heritage Foundation. Until the emergence of Trumpism and Trump himself, who seeks to accumulate more power and wealth for himself (no secret at all), the inclination of the Court was to prevent a wannabe from becoming a full-blown dictator. They are now in control of the appointments to keep power positions, and fellow traveler Trump is using the hammer of a totally politicized justice department to threaten and control past and present "enemies".
The goals of the Heritage Foundation in the 2024 elections were also no secret. It was in print and online, available for all to read. The irony is that the name of this foundation is not a reflection of the democratic heritage of the republic founded by our forefathers, but rather the opposite. It has been the promotion of the executive branch's power, aiming to turn it into a form of dictatorship, while maintaining the form of checks and balances, yet subverting the judiciary's and legislature's ability to effectively check the executive branch's power. The founders of our Republic warned us against exactly what Trump is trying to do and set up a form of government that kept the executive branch in check, giving the power of the purse to Congress, and an executive branch that was concerned about whether laws or governmental actions were in keeping with the intent of the Constitution. The Supreme Court and the independent judiciary were tasked with ruling on whether laws conformed to the Constitution. The duties of the executive branch were outlined in the "take care" clauses throughout the document.
It was the rule of law, not the rule of a king, a tyrant, foreign or domestic, that shaped the founders in devising the Constitution in 1789. Kings and tyrants were to be feared and prevented. That is the heritage we have, not the one the Heritage Foundation's deceptively named think tank supports and now dominates the Trump administration, in tune with their leader, who also wants to be an autocrat, too. (Autocrat: another name for a dictator, as "autocrat" sounds to a degree to be less all-powerful or threatening).
Trump is now consolidating his power in various ways that resemble those of a dictator, testing the limits of his authority until the Supreme Court intervenes. He has indicated he will stand by what the Supreme Court rules, but on that promise, we should not trust, as he has a history of breaking promises to get elected. (i.e., I will reduce your cost of living, end the Ukraine war on day one). Instead he has been obsessed and consumed by getting revenge and frightening with threats into keeping mouths shut or into actual verbal compliance with his purposes
.Now Trump is hell bent by tariffs, labor shortages due to mass deportation, and making sure everyone in government or receiving federal funds, top to bottem is loyal to him but not to the empty pledges of loyalty oaths to the constitution, his attempt to put the federal governent in control of tabulation and methods of voting instead of the states, his attempted firing of officials of once hands off independent agencies, his trampling of civil rights and due process, his attempt to frighten so many into subservience to him by using his department of justice to launch investigations without probable cauise except for the crime of being disloyal to him. and his ordering state governors to rediscrt to give him continued control of the House..
Update: 9 9 2025. The 6-3 Supreme Court just gave the green light to ICE to snatch people off the street because they look Hispanic and sound Hispanic. It is racial profiling, pure and simple. I am disgusted. The voice of dissent, Justice Sotomayor, wrote:"We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low-wage job," she wrote. "Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent." Trump's Supreme Court is chipping away at civil rights with no explanation other than "it's not our job to set immigration enforcement policy," and we need to call them out. That should send a chill through anyone who does not look white.
MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: So is Trump now appealing for the pro dictator vote while he says he is not one?
The Supreme Court has expanded Trump’s power. He’s seeking much more.
Full List as Supreme Court Rules for Donald Trump 15 Times in a Row - Newsweek
Supreme Court Keeps Ruling in Trump’s Favor, but Doesn’t Say Why - The New York Times
Meet the powerful group behind Trump’s judicial nominations about the Federalist Society
McConnell went 'nuclear' to confirm Gorsuch. But Democrats changed Senate filibuster rules first.
