The Supreme Court of the United States' (SCOTUS) conservative shift is no longer just a political talking point. It is showing up in the numbers. A Washington Post analysis of 270 decisions from the court’s first five terms with a six-justice conservative majority found that, since Trump’s three appointees joined the bench, the side seeking to expand civil rights has won only 44% of the time in cases involving women and minorities — the first such majority-side setback of this kind since at least the 1950s.
Also Read | Delhi tribunal awards ₹2.72 crore to teen paralysed in 2023 accident
The analysis suggests the shift goes well beyond civil rights. The three Trump appointees - Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett on the bench have moved the court further right than any modern predecessor on both religious liberty and voting-related rulings.
No middle ground
One of the clearest patterns to emerge from the data was the court’s hard turn on civil rights. Since the three Trump appointees joined the bench, the side arguing for broader civil-rights protections has prevailed in just 44% of cases.
That marks a break from every other period examined back to the early 1950s, when the Supreme Court generally backed civil-rights expansion in a majority of such rulings. The strongest pro-civil-rights showing came during the Earl Warren era, when the court ruled that way in 74% of these cases.
The Warren court remains one of the most consequential in US history. It delivered the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, struck down school segregation and broadened voting rights and protections for criminal defendants.
An outsize role in shaping the nation
In recent terms, many of the civil-rights disputes before the court have centered on gay and transgender rights, and in most of those cases, the justices have sided against them. Last year, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-transition treatment for minors and allowed religious parents to pull their children from lessons that included LGBTQ+ books. In 2023, it also ruled that a website designer could invoke the First Amendment to refuse work for same-sex weddings.
This term, the court appears ready to go further. In March, the justices struck down a Colorado law restricting “conversion therapy” for gay and transgender minors, raising questions about similar laws in nearly 30 states. During January arguments, the conservative majority also appeared open to letting states bar transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports.
The court has not limited its retreat on civil rights to LGBTQ+ cases. It has also rolled back protections in other areas, most notably by striking down affirmative action in college admissions.
Also Read | How much votes polled in Assam, Kerala, and Puducherry till 3 PM? Strong turnout marks polling day
One of the most striking takeaways from the analysis is how far the court has expanded the role of religion in public life. Over the past five terms, the justices have ruled in favour of parties asserting religious rights in 98% of cases — a rate unmatched by any Supreme Court in roughly the past 75 years.
At the same time, the court’s handling of emergency appeals has added to the controversy. Since returning to office, Donald Trump has secured favourable outcomes in roughly 75% of such cases, intensifying scrutiny of the court’s so-called “shadow docket.” Democrats and the court’s liberal wing have argued that these orders reflect a pattern of political bias toward the president.
