Six Supreme Court Decisions That Destroyed Our Political System and Led to a Lawless, Autocratic Presidency, Part 1

Six decisions by the Supreme Court’s Republican-appointed majority led by Chief Justice John Roberts resulted in a historically corrupt political money system, a return to Jim Crow racial discriminatory voting policies, extremely unfair gerrymandered congressional districts and a lawless, autocratic presidency.

These six opinions reveal a concerted, systematic attack by the Roberts majority on the rules of our democracy and an utter disdain for past Supreme Court decisions and the numerous, respected Justices who issued these decisions over decades.

Part 1 deals with Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), Shelby County v. Holder (2013) and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2014).

Part 2, next week, deals with Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), Trump v. United States (2024) and Callais v. Louisiana (2026).

Chief Justice Roberts wrote four of these disastrous opinions.

The First Three Decisions:

Citizens United (2010), a 5-4 opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy

The Citizens United decision in 2010 overturned a century of national policy, overruled past Supreme Court precedent and set the stage for the return of unlimited contributions and secret, or dark, money to federal elections.

Since the Citizens United decision, Washington has been flooded with influence-seeking contributions from billionaires, millionaires, Super PACs, dark money nonprofits and corporations.

The rapid growth of Super PACs, stemming from the decision, particularly those that support a single candidate, have eviscerated the candidate contribution limits found necessary to prevent corruption and the appearance of corruption in Buckley v. Valeo (1976).

Nearly $15 billion was spent on the 2024 presidential and congressional elections according to Open Secrets. This massive spending created endless opportunities for the wealthy and powerful to use huge contributions and secret money to buy Washington influence and policies and to turn ordinary Americans into second-class citizens.

Shelby County v Holder (2013), a 5-4 opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts

The passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) was an iconic moment in our history. It started the end of the racial discriminatory Jim Crow voting policies which some states wielded against Black Americans and other minority citizens.

The legislation was repeatedly reauthorized by Congress over decades and is recognized as the most successful civil rights legislation in history. When re-enacted in 2006, the VRA had overwhelming bipartisan support, passing the Senate 98 to 0 and the House 390 to 33.

Seven years later, the law, which had been upheld for decades, came crashing down.

The Shelby County decision overturned nearly a half century of national policy. The decision, written by Chief Justice Roberts, rendered inoperative the Section 5 requirements for certain states and localities to get “preclearance” for voting policy changes to ensure that the policies did not racially discriminate against blacks and other minorities. Roberts had been campaigning against the VRA for decades.

He said in Shelby County that “Our decision in no way affects the permanent, nationwide ban on racial discrimination in voting found in §2.” Last week, Roberts joined in supporting the Callais v Louisiana decision that in the words of Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent “renders Section 2 all but a dead letter.”

The Callais opinion has resulted in immediate efforts by southern states to gerrymander congressional districts in order to get rid of Black representatives in Congress.

McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission (2014), a 5-4 opinion by Chief Justice Roberts

The McCutcheon decision overturned forty years of national policy and past precedent by declaring unconstitutional the limit on the total amount a donor could give to all candidates and political committees in a two-year cycle.

The Roberts opinion argued the limit was not constitutional because it did not prevent corruption or the appearance of corruption. But Democracy 21 and others had explained in briefs to the Supreme Court just how removing the overall limit would lead to the corrupting contributions that were the basis for upholding the constitutionality of contribution limits in Buckley (1976).

By striking the overall limit, the McCutcheon opinion opened the door to presidential candidates and other federal officeholders soliciting and donors contributing huge individual amounts through national party joint fundraising committees. In 2016, presidential candidate Trump solicited individual contributions of as much as $449,400 per donor. In 2024, presidential candidate Biden solicited as much as $929,600 per donor.

These were precisely the kind of huge contributions that the Supreme Court was warned would occur if they struck down the overall contribution limit. Roberts gave the warnings the back of his hand and opened the door wide to huge corrupting contributions.

Conclusion

As a result of Citizens United and McCutcheon, our nation has the most corrupt political money system in modern times, if not in our history – and our government and political system are on the auction block.

As a result of Shelby County – and Callais – the abhorrent racially discriminatory Jim Crow voting policies have been returned to our country, with disastrous consequences.

Together, these, and next week’s, cases cripple the rules that curb influence-buying political money, protect voting rights, and provide accountability for public power and public officials. The Roberts majority represents a radical, partisan Court that will not withstand the test of time and will be overridden in the future.

________

Fred’s Weekly Note appears on Thursdays in Wertheimer’s Political Report, a Democracy 21 newsletter. Read this week’s newsletter, and other recent editions, here. And subscribe for free here and receive your copy each week via email.