The 1 issue that hardens the Supreme Court's ideological split


The Supreme Court isn't so ideologically scrambled, after all.
Justices handed down two decisions Thursday morning, on the final day of the court's term — one upholding a pair of Arizona election laws that challengers said discriminated against minorities, and another striking down a California policy requiring charities and nonprofits to disclose their major donors. In both cases, the split was identical: The court's six Republican-appointed justices were in the majority, and its three Democratic-appointed justices dissented.
Such partisan divisions were expected when then-President Donald Trump last year appointed Amy Coney Barrett to the high court and cemented a conservative majority. During her first term, though, the court has produced some unexpected results. It handed down more unanimous decisions than it had in years, and came up with a surprising 7-2 decision that preserved Obamacare. A few observers suggested there might actually be a 3-3-3 ideological split among justices, and some conservatives made the case that liberal fears of a Republican supermajority on the court had been overblown — the three Trump-appointed justices, National Review's Jim Geraghty wrote Tuesday, "could help create a less intensely divided Court."
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Perhaps not. The split in Thursday's rulings was stark and predictable. What made them different from the other cases this term? The topic at hand was electoral power. The Arizona laws were openly designed to give the GOP an edge in that state's elections, while the California disclosure policy was challenged by conservative advocacy groups interested in keeping their financial backers in the shadows.
It makes sense that the court's ideological borders would reassert themselves in these cases. Probably the No. 1 issue dividing Republicans and Democrats these days is democracy itself — Democrats want more, and the GOP wants less, and in both cases take those positions out of electoral self-interest. "An abiding principle that unites the entire GOP from McConnell to Trump to Roberts: making things harder for voters and easier for donors," MSNBC's Chris Hayes observed after the court's verdicts were announced. On issues from health care to religious liberty and beyond, there is room for justices across the political spectrum to freelance. When it came to the future of America's elections, though, everybody fell in line.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
'The answer isn't to shake faith in the dollar'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Dutch government falls over immigration policy
speed read The government collapsed after anti-immigration politician Geert Wilders quit the right-wing coalition
-
The Week Junior Book Awards 2025 Shortlist Announced
The Week Junior Book Awards have unveiled the 2025 shortlist, celebrating the best in children’s literature across 13 categories.
-
Law: The battle over birthright citizenship
Feature Trump shifts his focus to nationwide injunctions after federal judges block his attempt to end birthright citizenship
-
Is Trump trying to take over Congress?
Talking Points Separation of powers at stake in Library of Congress fight
-
Supreme Court weighs court limits amid birthright ban
speed read President Trump's bid to abolish birthright citizenship has sparked questions among federal judges about blocking administration policies
-
Supreme Court allows transgender troop ban
speed read The US Supreme Court will let the Trump administration begin executing its ban on transgender military service members
-
'The results speak for themselves'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Supreme Court takes up Trump birthright appeal
Speed Read The New Jersey Attorney General said a constitutional right like birthright citizenship 'cannot be turned on or off at the whims of a single man'
-
The anger fueling the Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez barnstorming tour
Talking Points The duo is drawing big anti-Trump crowds in red states
-
Why the GOP is nervous about Ken Paxton's Senate run
Today's Big Question A MAGA-establishment battle with John Cornyn will be costly