The Shadow Docket

Résumé du livre

Stephen Vladeck is the Chair of Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law. He has argued more than a dozen cases before the Supreme Court, and his work has appeared in legal journals such as the Harvard Law Review and the Yale Law Journal. He is currently a Supreme Court analyst for CNN.

Public trust in the Supreme Court is eroding, and Vladeck identifies the shadow docket as a major contributor to this decline. The issue lies not only in the unsigned, unexplained, and increasingly frequent nature of these rulings but also in their tendency to align with specific political agendas, creating a troubling pattern. This undermines the Court’s credibility and its role as a coequal branch of government, which relies on public confidence to enforce its decisions. Transparency is key to addressing these concerns, and efforts to scrutinize the shadow docket are gaining momentum. Critics like conservative attorney Donald Ayer and Justice Elena Kagan have voiced strong objections to the Court’s handling of these cases, while Chief Justice John Roberts has emerged as a rare figure willing to dissent from his conservative peers in shadow docket rulings. The shadow docket, which encompasses procedural decisions like granting certiorari and issuing injunctions, constitutes the vast majority of the Court’s rulings. However, its opaque nature and growing use to enact significant legal changes—often favoring conservative outcomes—have raised alarms. This shift became particularly pronounced in the mid-2010s, with decisions affecting areas like elections, immigration, and capital punishment. For instance, the Purcell Principle, established in *Purcell v. Gonzalez* (2006), and the *Shelby County v. Holder* (2013) ruling collectively enabled restrictive voting laws, disproportionately impacting elections. The pandemic further highlighted a partisan trend in shadow docket rulings, favoring Republicans. Historically reserved for urgent cases, emergency relief requests surged under the Trump administration, with a striking number approved, often overriding lower court decisions unfavorable to the administration. This evolving use of the shadow docket underscores its profound impact on the legal and political landscape.

Pour lire le reste du livre, téléchargez Bitely