Jim Hartman: The Supreme Court and public opinion

Jim Hartman

Jim Hartman

Share this: Email | Facebook | X

The Supreme Court ended its 2023 term with landmark decisions that dismayed liberals and caused conservatives to celebrate.

Over the course of just two days, the Supreme Court up-ended affirmative action and found President Joe Biden’s student debt cancellation plan unconstitutional.

Unlike last year when the court greatly upset liberals by overturning Roe vs. Wade, this year’s big rulings won’t spark a backlash from the general public.

Public polling last year found Roe, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide, was widely popular.

Shortly before Roe was overturned by the Dobbs vs. Jackson decision, a Fox News poll found 63% of voters were opposed to such a move, while 27% supported it. An ABC poll had 54% wanting the court to uphold Roe and 28% wanting it overturned.

The large majority of voters who wanted abortion to be legal nationally have maintained their position since the Supreme Court struck down Roe in June 2022.

Since that time, abortion supporters have won every related measure placed on the ballot in seven states, both blue and red.

Public support for the Supreme Court has declined. Only 31% of voters hold a positive view of the high court in a recent NBC News poll, significantly below a 50% positive view in 2018.

While many liberals may deplore the Supreme Court’s six-Justice majority decision on June 29 to end race-based affirmative action in higher education, the American public is strongly supportive.

The two cases at issue were brought against Harvard and the University of North Carolina by Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA v. Harvard, and SFFA v. UNC). Both schools used race to favor some applicants at the expense of others – most often Asian-Americans.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts unequivocally declared their admissions processes to be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Roberts wrote. “The student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual – not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite.”

Ending consideration of race and ethnicity in college admissions isn’t really controversial.

A June Pew Research poll found 50% of Americans disapproved of colleges taking race and ethnicity into account in admissions. Only 33% approved.

A recent CBS poll showed even more opposition: 70% of Americans indicated the Supreme Court should not allow colleges to consider race or ethnicity in admissions.

In deepest blue California, Biden thumped Trump by 30 points in 2020, while voters rejected 57%-43% a measure repealing California’s 1996 ban on affirmative action. When California is against affirmative action, it shouldn’t be surprising the whole nation is.

On June 30, the court’s 6-3 majority overruled Biden’s unilateral decision to cancel $430 billion in student debt for 43 million borrowers in Biden vs. Nebraska.

An ABC News poll showed 45% approved of the court striking down his action, with 40% disapproving.

The Constitution’s separation of powers was at issue – Congress’s Article I power of the purse. After Congress rebuffed Biden’s proposals to cancel student debt, he suddenly discovered in August 2022 the authority to do so himself.

Biden previously admitted he didn’t have the right to wipe-out student debt. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2021 said the President couldn’t unilaterally forgive loans. “That has to be an act of Congress,” she maintained.

His action was a cynical ploy to sway younger voters in November 2022, knowing the program was illegal. He now calculates student debtors can be turned against the court in 2024.

Biden was emphatically rebuked in four major cases this term for his unlawful executive power grabs.

“This is not a normal court,” Biden rants. Demonizing the Supreme Court until now has been largely successful, but Democrats miscalculate if they believe this year’s decisions will hurt the court’s public standing.

E-mail Jim Hartman at lawdocman1@aol.com.