Try the political quiz
 @ISIDEWITHNewsUnited StatesTrump administrationSupreme CourtTransparencyJudicial Process•••11mos ago

Supreme Court's 'Shadow Docket' Raises Alarms Over Unexplained, Rapid Decisions

A growing number of legal experts and commentators are sounding the alarm over the U.S. Supreme Court's increasing reliance on its 'shadow docket'—a process for issuing emergency, often unsigned and unexplained, decisions.

Critics argue that this trend undermines the Court's legitimacy and transparency, as major rulings are made without public reasoning or accountability. The Trump administration has been a frequent beneficiary of these expedited decisions, which bypass the usual deliberative process. Observers warn that this practice erodes public trust and makes it difficult to assess whether the Court is following the law or simply exercising unchecked power.

Calls are mounting for the Supreme Court to provide clear explanations for its emergency rulings to maintain its credibility and the rule of law.

.
+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Supreme Court?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

No replies yet…

Be the first to reply to this general discussion.

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies