Yes

Does the Supreme Court Have It In for the Democratic Party?

This has been another episode of simple answers to simple questions.

Kevin Drum is wondering whether the Supreme Court, or more accurately its 5 conservative justices, are acting out of a desire to gain political advantage for the Republican Party, rather than just conservative judicial philosophy:

When it comes to judicial activism, conservatives claim that we liberals have nothing to complain about. The Warren Court was famously activist in a liberal direction, after all, and we lefties thought that was just fine. But there's a real difference here. The famous Warren Court decisions — ending school segregation, expanding the right to counsel, enforcing one-man-one vote, banning organized school prayer — were obviously decisions that conservatives didn't like. But there was nothing in them that was especially damaging to the interests of the Republican Party.

But things are different this time around.

Indeed.

Undoubtedly.

The tell was in 2001, when they wrote an opinion that amounted to a coup d'etat and said that it could never be used as precedent in Bush v. Gore.

When a judge says you can't use a ruling as precedent, it's kind of like a banker telling you that it would they don't want you purchasing in high commission financial products from them, you had better literally be naked in bed with them, because like it or not, someone is getting f%$#ed.