With more than two dozen cases still to be decided by the Supreme Court this month – including what will surely be divisive rulings on abortion rights and gun control – the justices are likely to take a beating in the court of public opinion. With Americans’ trust in the court already below 50 percent, any additional drop will be a new low point.
The latest polling by Morning Consult found just 46 percent of Americans have “some” or “a lot of” trust in the Supreme Court, down from a recent high of 57 percent in April.
It’s the court’s lowest score since Morning Consult began asking the question. In fact, for much of 2020 and 2021, the court’s “trust” rating exceeded 60 percent.
In early May, Politico published a draft of a majority opinion that would unwind the right to an abortion provided in Roe v. Wade. The draft reopened divisions over abortion and restarted a debate that involves science, partisanship, religion and privacy.
But, according to Justice Clarence Thomas, the leak also severely undermined faith in the Supreme Court.
“I do think that what happened at the court is tremendously bad,” he said at a conference in May. “I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them.”
By May 8, a few days after the publication of the draft opinion, trust in the court had dropped below 50 percent for the first time in Morning Consult’s tracking.
With a final ruling on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization expected in the coming days or weeks, there’s sure to be renewed outcry. More than 60 percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases, but the if the final opinion reflects the draft and wipes out federal protections, each state will be able to make its own laws regarding abortion.
More than a dozen states have already passed bans or restrictions on abortion that would go into effect if Roe is overturned.
The Supreme Court is also expected to rule on a challenge to a New York law that limits carrying a concealed weapon in public. In the wake of multiple mass shootings that have spurred new action on gun violence, this ruling will also be under intense scrutiny.
The latest poll, conducted June 2-4 of 2,210 adults with a margin of error of 2 percentage points, also shows new lows for trust in Congress (33 percent), the electoral process (44 percent) and government in general (39 percent).
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.