the country's legal landscape on abortion, guns, religion and more.
Correspondent John Yang unpacks the historic term that's now come
to a close.
And looks ahead to what could come next.
The court rewrote law and redefined writes in ways that will reverberate
through American society for many years, and with the cases they've
already agreed to hear when the justices come back in the fall.
There is likely to be more to come. Marcia Coyle covers the Supreme
Court for the National Law Journal, Marcia At the beginning of this
term that just ended. There was a lot of people wondering.
What this supermajority. If you will of six conservative justices
would do And at the end of the term, I think we've got the answer.
I think that this is a very conservative.
Aggressive new court and we've seen it in a number of opinions this
term, I think it was probably clearest in their decision.
To take on the abortion case and the gun case in the gun situation,
the court had been turning away numerous gun rights petitions.
Usually with a dissenting opinion, written by Justice Thomas saying
that the court had made a constitutional orphan of the Second Amendment.
But after Justice Barrett came on the bench
The court took the case and with the abortion case, the court reached
out to take this case when they didn't have to. I think this court
has a younger majority now and yes, these new justices
Primarily the three appointed by former president Trump Know where
they want to go. So I think it's an aggressive court. What more can
I say to ask you about the area of religion? I mean, it used to be
that courts would try.
To navigate between the, uh the establishment clause on the one hand,
with the First Amendment, saying that that worried about government
speech seeming to endorse religion.
And then the free expression expression clause protecting people's
right to free expression of religion in the first Amendment, where
is that that balance now after this this term
I think the court the Roberts court has been on a consistent trend
in that elevates the free exercise clause above the establishment
clause.
Uh, Justice. Bryer used to talk about how it's true that those two
clauses can sometimes clash and what you would try to look for is
he called it the play within the joints to reach some sort of compromise.
But I think that play within the joints is has pretty much disappeared
in the Warren Court, the sixties and seventies.
Religious religion related decisions were generally, uh, protective
or in favor of religious minorities. But since the nineties, and
the Rehnquist and Roberts court and particularly the Roberts court,
the religion decisions have been in favor of majority or mainstream
religions term also saw something unprecedented. The leak
Of a draft opinion in the in the abortion case. Is there any sense
of what that's done to the relationship among the justices, and in
the way that justices work together, But I think, uh,
We? We have a little sense of it. Certainly. Justice Thomas made
comments about how it has affected the justices. Ability to trust
each other. The cord, uh, really believes in protecting the privacy
of its decision making process and
To have a major league like that, and unprecedented leak makes it
seem just like you know, any other political institution In the closing
weeks of the term. We got some big big opinions about some contentious
issues, and there was some
Sharp language in some of the opinions. I did find somewhat striking
that some of the dissenters in a sense we're calling out.
The court. The majority, uh, as aggressive. I think it was justice
Sotomayor, who said in one of her descent, she called them
A new and restless court, and those sort of comments are striking
to me because they strike they go to the legitimacy of the court
itself.
The court never wants to be seen as changing law because someone
new has come on the bench. There's much been said about the activities
of the wife of one of the justices Clarence Thomas's wife, Jenny.
Uh, do you think that has had an effect or an impact on the courts
image?
I think it definitely has the failure. Alleged failure of Justice
Thomas to recuse from a case involving the January 6th investigating
committees.
Uh, desire to get White House documents. He was the only one who
dissented from that case and did not recuse the fact that his wife
Was involved in attempts to change the results of the election. All
of that, you know, it's just paint such a portrait for the court
that it's it's hard to shake along those same lines. Someone who's
been very concerned about the reputation of the court is the Chief
justice John Roberts would imagine that this has been a very difficult
term for him.
Prior to the court, getting a six justice, conservative majority
and it was only you know.
Two terms ago. He was very much in control in terms of cases, he
was in the middle and still able to cobble together majorities.
With the justices to his right and to his left. But now that there
are six conservatives on the court, uh you only need five for a majority
opinion. And this these five don't need Roberts.
And so he was in dissent a couple of times with the court's liberal
wing and then also, he wrote some concurring opinions as in the abortion
case in which he was in a sense, almost scolding them about how
Judicial, humility, modesty. Judicial restraint should lead them
to not, you know, overturned road. They did not accept his view,
and, um I don't see that It's going to get any easier for him. Um
His influence certainly has lessened because of the six Justice conservative
majority. We began this discussion by talking about how aggressive
this conservative majority is.
Yeah, talk a little bit about the cases they've already accepted
for argument when they return in the fall. Do you see signs of the
aggressiveness there? I believe so they have to affirmative action
cases, affirmative action in higher education has been rather settled.
For for a while now the court took them and I assume it's because
the court wants to say something about affirmative action in higher
education.
The court also has, uh, a couple of redistricting cases, challenges
involving, uh, race racial gerrymandering. They also have an election
related case.
Um, in North Carolina. That, uh, could be very important in terms
of the next presidential election. And finally, they're revisiting.
Uh, and an area that they did take up a while ago but didn't really
address the heart of the issue. Will Colorado has a law in which
a Web designer is refusing on the basis of religion?
Uh, to work with a same sex couple. Marcia Coyle, the National law
Journal. Thank you very much. My pleasure. John. Happy fourth.