Justice Kagan warns conservative rulings have damaged democracy

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan stated that recent conservative rulings have weakened the U.S. political system, describing some decisions as "very destructive of our democracy." She made these remarks during a discussion at Catholic University's Columbus School of Law on Tuesday. Kagan specifically criticized the 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which ruled that race-based gerrymandering of congressional districts was unconstitutional. In her dissent, Kagan labeled the ruling the "latest chapter in the majority's now-completed demolition of the Voting Rights Act." She extended her criticism to other election and campaign finance decisions, arguing that the court has blinded itself to the deleterious effects of its rulings on how the political system works.

Kagan attributed the errors in these decisions to a lack of appropriate concern or understanding of their consequences. She warned that rulings undermining voters' ability to choose their candidates have created a democracy that does not function as it should. The justice also challenged the conservative legal philosophy of originalism, calling it "misconceived" and "not a very good match with the Constitution we have." According to Kagan, these decisions have contributed to increased polarization in the country, particularly regarding campaign finance. She noted that Americans view the flow of money chasing political candidates as a nightmare, a sentiment she said is correct.

Despite her sharp criticisms, Kagan stopped short of accusing the court of being beholden to President Donald Trump. She pointed out several cases where conservative justices definitely pushed back against his agenda. Trump nominated three of the current justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. In response to Kagan's comments, Zack Smith, Heritage Foundation Senior Legal Fellow of Courts and the Constitution, told Fox News Digital that the court's job is to faithfully apply the Constitution and laws as written, not to play politics. Smith characterized Kagan's remarks and those of other far-left politicians as efforts to delegitimize Supreme Court decisions. He argued that while Kagan disagreed with the majority in some cases, that disagreement does not render the decisions illegitimate or wrongly decided.