The See-No-Evil Supreme Court
The Roberts Court accelerated its assault on the freedoms guaranteed by the Reconstruction amendments this term, leaving only the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship intact—and that by only one vote. Across multiple cases dealing with voting and immigration, a consistent theme has emerged from the Roberts Court’s jurisprudence: a determination to ignore, rationalize, or misrepresent the explicit animus of government officials—and the president in particular—toward the groups that have been targeted.This trend began in the first Trump administration, and has grown only more apparent as Donald Trump’s attacks on immigrants and ethnic minorities in the United States have become more brazen.
Reported by 1 outlet — The Atlantic. See all sources ↓
The Roberts Court accelerated its assault on the freedoms guaranteed by the Reconstruction amendments this term, leaving only the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship intact—and that by only one vote. Across multiple cases dealing with voting and immigration, a consistent theme has emerged from the Roberts Court’s jurisprudence: a determination to ignore, rationalize, or misrepresent the explicit animus of government officials—and the president in particular—toward the groups that have been targeted.This trend began in the first Trump administration, and has grown only more apparent as Donald Trump’s attacks on immigrants and ethnic minorities in the United States have become more brazen. The Court’s approach echoes one of the most notorious decisions in American history: the 1944 ruling in Korematsu v. United States, which upheld the forced relocation of tens of thousands of Japanese Americans in the middle of World War II.
Read the full report at The Atlantic ↗
Why it matters
A world story we're tracking; its significance and source trust firm up as more outlets confirm it.
- What's the story?
- The Roberts Court accelerated its assault on the freedoms guaranteed by the Reconstruction amendments this term, leaving only the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship intact—and that by only one vote. Across multiple cases dealing with voting and immigration, a consistent theme has emerged from the Roberts Court’s jurisprudence: a determination to ignore, rationalize, or misrepresent the explicit animus of government officials—and the president in particular—toward the groups that have been targeted.This trend began in the first Trump administration, and has grown only more apparent as Donald Trump’s attacks on immigrants and ethnic minorities in the United States have become more brazen.
- How widely is it covered?
- 1 outlet, average source rating 8.0/10.
- When was it last updated?
- 1m ago.
How outlets are framing the same story
Here's how each outlet is covering the story — compare their headlines and timing at a glance.
- Coverage card1 outlet1CoverageScouting report
The See-No-Evil Supreme Court
Sources1TypeCoverageThe Atlantic