Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Supreme Court is a threat to American democracy

Supreme Court
Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was a wake-up call for Americans who had grown complacent about their rights and freedoms. The court's decision was just the beginning of a series of rulings showcasing its alarming readiness to influence almost every facet of American life.


In a recent move, the court annulled the Chevron doctrine, a 40-year-old precedent that granted federal agencies extensive regulatory power. This ruling, coupled with the undermining of Roe, reveals a court determined to reshape the nation in its image, regardless of the cost to established law or the balance of power in our government. The situation is not just concerning; it's urgent, and immediate action is needed now.

The high court, tilted sharply to the right in its present configuration, seems determined to impose a rigid and distinct ideology on the nation. It's not just about abortion rights, though the loss of a half-century-old precedent is seismic enough. It's about the court's growing tendency to disregard precedent, ignore legal consensus and side with the powerful at the expense of the vulnerable. This disregard for precedent is not just a legal issue; it's a threat to our established law's fabric. For instance, the court's decisions have disproportionately affected women, minorities and low-income individuals These decisions further widen the gap between the haves and have-nots.

The justices' expansive view of their authority threatens the delicate checks and balances that safeguard our democracy. This trend, if left unchecked, could have far-reaching consequences for the health of our constitutional system. When the court intrudes into areas rightfully belonging to the legislative or executive branches, it undermines the people's ability to effect change through the democratic process. Only select judges should have the final say on matters of policy, which are best left to the people's elected representatives. By overstepping their constitutional role, the justices disrupted the careful balance of power envisioned by the Framers and diminished the citizenry's voice and power. In a representative democracy, the people must have a meaningful avenue to share in the country's direction. When the court legislates from the bench, it circumvents this process and consolidates excessive power in the judicial branch. This erosion of checks and balances is a dangerous trajectory that could ultimately imperil the stability and resilience of our democratic institutions.

The Supreme Court's recent decisions demonstrate a court in thrall to ideology rather than a moral commitment to the law. They expose the dangers of lifetime appointments and the court's lack of accountability. They underscore the urgent need for reform, whether through term limits, expansion of the court or some other mechanism to restore its balance and legitimacy. The need for reform is not just required; it's pressing, and our advocacy can make a difference. Moreover, the court's overreach threatens to alienate Americans from their democracy. When citizens see their elected representatives stripped of power and their votes rendered meaningless by unelected judges, they lose faith in the system. They grow apathetic, disengage from the political process and cede the field to extremist minorities.

The court's expanding reach presents a grave danger: not just the loss of this right or that, but the potential hollowing out of our democracy. The court needs to understand that its vast power is not without limits. If it does not voluntarily pull back from the brink, then the other branches of government and the people themselves must step in to restore the balance. The potential dismantling of democracy is an existential concern that we must all address. The fight to save democracy is not just about the next or future election. It's a generational struggle to ensure that our system of government remains accountable to the people above the shouts of a reactionary elite. The threat to our democracy is accurate, and we all have a responsibility to protect it.

The Supreme Court's recent power grab poses a threat not just to specific laws or rights but to the foundational principles of our democracy itself. Regardless of our political leanings, every American who cares about the future of our republic must recognize the danger this shift represents. In their rush to impose a narrow and divisive vision upon the nation, the court's ideologues have upset the delicate balance of power our system depends on. They have chosen to ignore decades of legal precedent, dismissing the people's will and our elected representatives' role in shaping the country's laws. This court's practices are not just an attack on certain cherished rights, though those are also undoubtedly under threat. It is a threat to the very essence of our self-governance, to the idea that, in a democracy, it is the people who ultimately determine the nation's direction.

We cannot afford to be complacent in the face of this threat. The court's actions demand a swift and decisive response from all of us. We must organize, mobilize and make our voices heard in the streets and at the ballot box. We must demand that our elected officials take action to check the court's power and defend the rights and principles that are under attack. This can be done through civic actions like contacting elected officials, participating in peaceful protests or voting in upcoming elections.

This will not be an easy fight and will only be won over time. But if we cede the field to the court's ideologues and allow them to reshape our country without resistance, we risk losing a few cherished freedoms and the heart of our democracy itself. Your engagement is crucial in this fight. Every voice matters, and every action counts. Together, we can and must defend the republic and ensure that it remains the people who have the power in the United States.

Read More

As the Earth Rumbles, the Sky Calls, LaLu, the Eagle, Wants To Speak!

A reflection on freedom, democracy, and moral courage in America, urging citizens to stand up before our values fly away.

Getty Images, James Gilbert

As the Earth Rumbles, the Sky Calls, LaLu, the Eagle, Wants To Speak!

As a professional dancer, I’ve always been grounded, but the earth is rumbling, and I am uncharacteristically unsteady. I’m not alone in this feeling. Shifting cultural values are rattling our sense of moral integrity. Unfathomable words (calling a congresswoman and the people “garbage”), acts of cruelty (killing survivors stranded in the ocean), or calling a journalist “piggy,” are playfully spun as somehow normal. Our inner GPS systems are not able to locate the center.

I’m climbing trees these days in order to get up off the earth. At the age of 74, it is frankly exhilarating – I am more cognizant of the danger, so I must be attentive. All my senses are buzzing as I negotiate the craggy shape of a giant, catalpa tree. I settle into a large, gently curving limb, which hugs my body like a nest. My cries enter the vastness of the universe, and the birds sing me to sleep. I’m trying to locate myself again. Dreams are vivid up in the air.

Keep ReadingShow less
Social media apps on a phone

A Pentagon watchdog confirms senior officials shared sensitive military plans on Signal, risking U.S. troops. A veteran argues accountability is long overdue.

Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto via Getty Images

There’s No Excuse for Signalgate

The Defense Department Inspector General just announced that information shared by Defense Secretary Hegseth in a Signal chat this spring could have indeed put U.S. troops, their mission, and national security in great peril. To recap, in an unforced error, our Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President conducted detailed discussions about an imminent military operation against Houthi targets in Yemen over Signal, a hackable commercial messaging app (that also does not comply with public record laws). These “professionals” accidentally added a journalist to the group chat, which meant the Editor-in-Chief of the Atlantic received real-time intelligence about a pending U.S. military strike, including exactly when bombs would begin falling on Yemeni targets. Had Houthi militants gotten their hands on this information, it would have been enough to help them better defend their positions if not actively shoot down the American pilots. This was a catastrophic breakdown in the most basic protocols governing sensitive information and technology. Nine months later, are we any safer?

As a veteran, I take their cavalier attitude towards national security personally. I got out of the Navy as a Lieutenant Commander after ten years as an aviator, a role that required survival, evasion, resistance, and escape training before ever deploying, in case I should ever get shot down. To think that the Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President could have so carelessly put these pilots in danger betrays the trust troops place in their Chain of Command while putting their lives on the line in the service of this country.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Democrat's Plan for Ending the War in Gaza
An Israeli airstrike hit Deir al-Balah in central Gaza on Jan. 1, 2024.
Majdi Fathi/NurPhoto via Getty Images

A Democrat's Plan for Ending the War in Gaza

Trump's 21-point peace plan for Gaza has not and will not go anywhere, despite its adoption by the UN Security Council. There are two reasons. One is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ultra-orthodox nationalist allies will not agree to an eventual Palestinian state in the occupied territories. The other is that Hamas will not stand down and give up its arms; its main interest is the destruction of Israel, not the creation of a home for the Palestinian people.

Democrats should operate as the "loyal opposition" and propose a different path to end the "war" and establish peace. So far, they have merely followed the failed policies of the Biden administration.

Keep ReadingShow less
How the Unprecedented Redistricting War Is Harming Election Officials, Politicians, and Voters

The Indiana State House is the site of the latest political fight over new congressional maps for the 2026 election.

Lee Klafczynski for Chalkbeat

How the Unprecedented Redistricting War Is Harming Election Officials, Politicians, and Voters

The redrawing of states’ congressional districts typically happens only once per decade, following the release of new U.S. Census data. But we’re now up to six states that have enacted new congressional maps for the 2026 midterms; that’s more than in any election cycle not immediately following a census since 1983-84. Even more are expected to join the fray before voters head to the polls next year. Ultimately, more than a third of districts nationwide could be redrawn, threatening to confuse and disenfranchise voters.

The truly unusual thing, though, is that four of those states passed new maps totally voluntarily. Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina all redrew their districts after President Donald Trump urged them to create more safe seats for Republicans to help the GOP maintain control of the House of Representatives next year, and California did so in order to push back against Trump and create more safe seats for Democrats. (The other two states redrew for more anodyne reasons: Utah’s old map was thrown out in court, and Ohio’s was always set to expire after the 2024 election.) To put that in perspective, only two states voluntarily redistricted in total in the 52 years from 1973 to 2024, according to the Pew Research Center.

Keep ReadingShow less